Hey all, thanks for watching! For those asking about the tooling, yes, the compression mold is a significant up-front investment for a part like this. But keep in mind that this bracket would be produced in volumes of 1,000s per year which lowers the tooling cost per part. For more info, shout out to Yannick Willemin our episode expert who is answering questions in the comments. (Also find him on LinkedIn! www.linkedin.com/in/yannickwillemin/) You can also read more about the 9T Labs technology in this article by Stephanie Hendrixson: www.additivemanufacturing.media/articles/fiber-reinforced-3d-printing-expands-control-applications-for-composites

As an Aircraft Design Weights Engineer I can say that this is amazing. One thingvthat you might have missed. The steel parts need painting, the composite parts might not. That is another potential weight saving. I lobe the idea that the Carbon is only installed where it is needed and the Polimer just holds it in place.

So emotional. Ok. What about impact strength? What about strength after overload? How many parts you need to produce to make printed-molded parts cheaper then machined parts? Repeatability? UV resistance? Tolerances? Abrasiv wear resistance? Low/hight temperature resistance? Why steel part doesn't have pockets for weight saving? As a new method of manufacturing its great, but comparing with steel looks like you just try to sell this technology.

For non-critical parts like this, it looks incredible. Of course, the steel part might have been an aluminum part for some weight savings, or have been made out of a smaller gauge. Looking at the gauge and cross sectional area of the steel part, I would estimate it has a minimum breaking strength that's probably around 7-9K lbs. An M8 8.8 bolt specs at around 6.5K lbs, and the amount of cross sectional area on the steel part is larger than an m8 bolt. I don't doubt that the fine engineers at 9T specced the part to appropriate strength and it will result in meaningful savings both on fuel costs and part costs, but it's somewhat unfair to say it has the "same strength". Testing a part once to the load strength does not make an appropriate test -- there needs to be at minimum a certain safety factor measured, and the material wear characteristics at repeated expected load to estimate the expected lifetime of the part, as the fatigue characteristics of a steel part are such that you could spec a part for what is effectively an infinite lifespan. Similarly, low and high temperature operations for various steel alloys are something that is well studied and predictable, and At the minimum, a destructive test to determine an N=1 MBS would have been great to see. In general I think for parts where space dimension vs performance tradeoffs are not critical, and repeated loads, temperature or stress don't play a limiting factor, a process like the one 9T Labs created will result on very meaningful innovation and weight savings for certain industries. I look forward the day when we actually start seeing high load cycle parts like a connecting rod in an engine made out of composite parts, but I think we're still quite a ways away from that. As another thought, machining that part might not be the cost effective solution -- looks like a 4 axis job. I imagine two parts welded together would be much more economical.

This is like the QVC of additive manufacturing products

Really glad I found this channel. Thanks for putting this content together!

They really won me over with this video. I honestly thought this was dumb at first, but the way they explained it was phenominal! Well done.

What could be interesting is that when you reduce weight of parts by replacing them with polymer parts as presented here, it may lead to reduced need for strength, as whole assembly gets lighter, so you can reduce strength and etc to the limit ofc. So potential for recursive savings :d

First, just because the metal and 3D printed parts both held 500 pounds doesn't mean they are equivalent. That would be like saying a Volkswagen and a Ferrari are equivalent because they can both go 30 miles per hour. Why didn't you test both parts to failure so you could know if they were really "equivalent?" Second, how does the part do at it's temperature extremes, in dynamic shock and in fatigue? The steel part might be designed to yield in a high strain event, like a crash, and not fail. How does the printed composite part do in a crash? You need to find out the requirements for a part before you propose alternatives. Is there an electrical conductivity requirement for helicopter doors, in the event of a lightning strike? This would add weight and cost to the printed hinges. Maybe these issues were all addressed by 9T, but it wasn't presented. It may be true that the printed composite part is 1/5th the weight of the steel part, but the printed part may be 1/5th the strength, or stiffness, or have 1/100th the strain capability. Until you do the engineering, you don't know.

I do not believe these two parts are comparable on technical levels, strength and overall conditional limitations. What T9 labs is doing may be very powerful for aerospace but not for common part manufacturing where's milling can. Thank you for brining them to light for the rest of us to see.

Very interesting process. I'm curious about the type of QA inspection required for the AM part. The billet steel part is probably just a pair of calipers and the CMTR's. With the AM part I would imagine they would want component measurements before assembly/ molding, and possibly UT or RT to check density (and verify presence & placement of the carbon reinforcement). Thanks again for the great content, and good on Carpenter for sponsoring this episode even though it doesn't involve powdered metal.

The thing about that steel bracket is yes it's expensive if you mill it out of a solid block. But I can make that part with plate stock, a drill press, and a welding jig. If it was aluminium I'd machine straight from T-extrusion

This'll become insanely strong once carbon nanotubes can be made practically and economically

Nice video, and absolutely inspiring to see 3D printing moving to the next level👍 I would love a bit more information on the temperature conditions this parts will see, and how the composite part holds up on this parameter. Can you share this?

He talks about cost but notice how they avoid the cost of the additional tooling. Also biggest part about 3D printing is Joe Schmoe can do it in his garage or home and he most likely couldn't if he needed tooling like molds. What's the life time of the part vs the metal part.

Can this part be welded on the field? Can it be repaired with glue or heat or both?

HIPing or Hot Isostatic Pressing allowed castings to become more dense and therefore stronger. This process using Printing and Compression Molding is simply amazing. Weight reduction [and costs] are very valuable to all weight sensitive components such as aircraft parts. Where will this go in the future? Amazing!

why not comparing to a metal AdM part after topology optimization also in parallel to original machined part?

I'm highly impressed with that part. would like to use this process myself. i just wish there was a recycling element to this

Compression molding is just another word for forging plastics!!! Even with the additional processing, the weight savings for an aircraft still may be worthwhile. The question is what is the compressive, tensile, dynamic and shear strength of the 3D printed part? What is the endurance life of the plastic part compared to the machined part?

So a hybrid manufacturing process. Nice. Best of both worlds.

I would like to see more detail behind the economics of this process. Explain the business case to replace the machined steel with printed/molded composite.

how does it hold up with a load on the side like if someone bumped that stack of I-Beams?

How small of parts can you make, a curve of mild steel 0.7 long, 0.13 wide and 0.05 thick? Needs to be surface hardened. Please reply, trying to find someone to make batches of 100.

Sounds like a better comparison would be to compare this to a traditional CFRP, where it reduces or completely automates the layup process

Why don't they use a injection molding with reinforced carbon fibre in it !

As far as cost, I find it hard to imagine the composite part being more cost effective because of the “elephant in the room”,, the need for a mold and that mold has to be machined. Strength is questionable too, as it’s “multi part” fused together, in the test, the weight is pulling in one direction, straight down, that isn’t how a door hinge should be tested. And lastly, especially on a helicopter which a lot of times is described as a collection of parts all trying very hard to explode away from each other in all different directions. This isn’t taking into account the thermal changes involved. Composite printing is truly amazing and industry changing, but I do see flaws in this part as “manufactured” to stack up against a 1 piece machined piece of steel.. Great video, thanks so much for sharing with us!

I understand what you are saying about the tooling cost being eliminated by volume but another problem is cost of raw material. In general for our engineering shop, engineered polymers are more expensive than ferrous metals. As new polymers become tested, their costs increases. How do we then deal with this challenge?

Im Pete. Im Stephanie. Lmao so simple and i love it

The question shouldn't be think about where else in the world do you see metal brackets that can be replaced with these composite ones, but what else this construction method can extrapolate to. It being cheaper while being functionally equivalent is enough reason for manufacturers to use it, but I'm more excited on how this could enable greater efficiency and performance in weight sensitive applications.

If this 3D part were flat, it would be merely interesting. That the part has a 90 degree angle that can handle such a load is truly a testament to awesome modern technology.

are there metal inserts in the plastic part ? that will change stress distribution

I question the cost calms, what it the volume being made? That mold cost the same as hundreds of them steel parts and what about time, time is money. How many printers would you need to keep up with one CNC machine?

What about the mold cost, for the compression step? They dont seem to have a business case once you have to take this into consideration.

I wouldn't go chasing polymers just yet. One thing to consider is where these items get used and what environments they will be used in. Are they indoor, outdoor? Is this a marine application? The same goes for any building material.

But that aluminum part can be machined by the $3000 CNC. I want to know the way you calculate the cost.

Helicopter part I.E probable cyclic loading. We all know that composite/3d printed metal parts have almost no fatigue limit and would be almost useless in high cycle repetative loading.

So so good! Thank you for the education! The bottleneck for this technology is awareness and you are solving that! +1 Sub!

To be put into helicopter service this part would need to demonstrate much more than just equal strength. Is the part exposed to sunlight and is the part UV resistant? Does the composite fatigue or become brittle over time? Is the composite resistant to exposure to the various oils that are used in the helicopter and which could end up coating the part? Does the part fail suddenly or gradually? How is the strength dependent on temperature?

Cool solution but This static test is not enough. A real torture test : twist; pressure ; friction; heat...

I am no engineer but not every application is best suited for 3d printed part. That was just a simple lift test but what about if the part was banged into creating lateral forces. That would be a whole different story in my opinion. I would stick with the machined part.

Now you can improve your design or share it for viewers to bring you a best design. Next option compression tests. Lightest beam to hold 1000kg and such. I like the material science. Thank you for your hard work.

How does this process compare to the MarkForged X7 onyx with carbon fiber filament? I'd be very interested to see!

Another excellent episode. I love the format. (Also commenting for algo)

AWESOME!!!

Add heat to both parts while testing. Also lets see a side load test.

I understand why weight would be a major factor for this application, but when it is less of a concern, how does it compare to a forged part? Forged parts would seem to be faster and less costly.

Have you considered creating an SOP around the setup for your guests to record? Outlining all the successful components of a good recording?

The bigger question is witch one is recyclable ONLY ONE

I'm quite surprised that it's cheaper. It requires special tooling and knowledge that is pretty cutting edge. It requires many steps, more than the CNC part.

Always a good idea to find ways to fill our environment with more Plastic. And its So Cheap! Yeah…… At least the Tooling can be melted back down to retrieve some off the costs for a failure off an idea. Lets put the Environmental Cost into this equation not to mention Safety Margins, metals fail gracefully unlike synthetic’s.

there is still Titanium and Titanium-Composites to consider.. also light and strong.. Every tool has it's function.. To really say this works one needs to know the forces that a particular part needs to absorb.. in short a VS comparison only works per specifiek application not a generalization bracket a vs bracket b..without more info. would have bin nice to see a stress comparison

This type of machine could be used to transport power delivery in some applications- say from a LifePO4 battery box, you could lay the fibres in a way to have enough thickness to safely transfer energy "through" a material as carbon fibre is conductive.... all the while having sufficient separation, hm. Carbon fibres may be more expensive but this is a more integrated system, I suppose

havent watched many episodes, but since this is not the first one which says its a helicopter part i think they are secretly building one from 3d-printed parts...

You guys should look at the Mark two from Markforged, does all that with out the compression. Also look at the metal X

This seems like the FDM portion is completely unnecessary. Why would you not fixture your components/pattern in the tooling that is already in use and skip the printing portion altogether? Designing for support the static load is the bare minimum of any bracket. How does this hold up to the many fatigue cycles of opening the door and also all of the vibrations during flight? I am also assuming that the plastic can handle the extreme temperature fluctuations between takeoff and landing.

It looks good, but can it really take the where in tear? that’s my question and my skepticism.

I can't speak for everything but a fire arm that is fiber reinforced Polymer Vs. a steel gun I will take steel any day especially if either were exposed to a squib load. Also the metal bracket was it a MIM part or machined from a single block of steel if the later I would love to see both brackets exposed to lateral & Shear stress.

idk that test is like me and Brian Shaw both squatting a 135 lb barbell and saying "they're the same strength but this one is lighter!"

Only down side for an industrial application is the fact that it cannot be field welded or repaired as easily. But, I guess you could replace certain parts with a metal fabricated part or if it is more economical have spares on hand. I know that a lot of drag racers ran into this problem with titanium and the fact that it was very difficult to repair at the track do to the complex welding process. The beauty of steel is that most of the time a competent welder can repair the component in the field and have a part nearly as good as new or make quick design changes to improve its performance without having to rebuild the whole part. For example, lets take a 3d printed composite flange with a bolt pattern that dose not line up. Steel would be an easy fix. Braze it the hole shut, re drill and tap. I dont think thats doable with printed plastic.

Biodegradble polymer and recover and reuse of resources would be ideal for this. Not saying I know enough about this stuff but we already have enough problems because of plastic do we not?

That steel part machined from billet is not cheap. Stunning that the composite one could lift 900 lbs.

From the method of making this product, looks like mechanical properties of material is not isotropic? Is it worth it to create a method to make the material of carbon fiber product isotropic?

The big weakness i would like to know how they address it is that multiple parts after injection molding won't have a single continuous fiber. So the plate and the perpendicular ribbon are still only connected by plastic, sure it does has amazing strength in-plane. But stresses will concentrate exactly on the joints where only connected by plastic, decreasingly the actual overall strength of the part, there would be no point in having everything else be carbon fiber reinforced if yield strength is still the plastics regular strength

There's no way the printed part was cheaper than the machined part. Has it been certified by the FAA/EASA/IASA? Does it get brittle in low temperatures and break with the vibration a helicopter would experience?

Just a reminder, that the machined part is MUCH stronger and could in fact hold many times the strain compared to the plastic one. Also, if the requirement for loads would be what the plastic one can handle, the machined part could be much smaller and thinner. This comparison is kind of apples to oranges, and does not make really sense. They should have been engineered for the same load, so we could see what is the size and cost difference. Probably the bolt's would be the most critical part to determine the max load. Cheers!

嗯，只有在必须高性能的场合才会用这样的工艺吧，否则为啥不用钛合金和CNC呢？

Composites do have a fatal flaw which will come up in daily use and abuse, especially in military, EMS and industrial use: They can't take a hit and maintain their designed original mechanical propertues due to delamination and fracture propagation. This is well known problem with high end bicycle frames that get knocked against rocks etc. and can develop fractures that slowly develop over time and then catastrophically fail all at once often at the worst possible moment.

问题是：疲劳特性是怎样的呢？

I like it. But I wonder why anyone would machine a bracket like that? It could easily be made out of two plates welded together, or even stamping it out from a few pieces and spot welded...

Resin should probably be infused, not "infiltrated". Unless the fabric is occupying a defensive position...

Very good

True but where is the breaking Test,

This really is a 3d printed preform not a 3d printed part, and there is value in that.

so molding or 3d printing

Imagine the instant range increase you would get from an Ev made from this, weighing less than half your average one! You could turn a 2000kg car with a 100kw battery that gets say 500km range into a 900kg car with a 60kw battery that get 700km of range for less money....Rough figures obviously but probably not far from possible considering the Aptera.

I’ve gotta ask is the 3-D printed part recyclable like the metal part is that a question cannot be recycled and make another part like the metal one

How about the cost?

maybe they should consider the rescyclingprocess of this plasticthingy too and then u stay with the good old metal part.

Like this video~~ So Perfect

Why to go for 3d printing when you can injection mould

Bicycle application?

That steel part should have been aluminum if the strength wasn't required. It should also be welded from two parts, rather than machined. Welding an aluminum version would have been cheap and fast.

90 degree angles are not rounded in your plastic parts which may cause them to crack.

what about mass production?

nice brackets

I found your channel wonderful and very informative . thanks for sharing. a fellow creator---

The best part is no part. Next they'll be 3D printing the two parts this connects, as one!

all good but the metal part is not weight optimized, which could be much lighter.....

Continues carbon fiber would seem to be much stronger than chopped fiber.

3D printing gonna replace a lot of machining & other type of jobs

The original bracket is overkill and probably could have been sheet metal or just copy-pasted out of alloy if ~400 kg of tension was acceptable. No wonder helicopters are so expensive. Like, who the heck makes a door hinge that has to be machined out of a solid billet of stainless steel?

The hinge should be integrated into the 3D printed door, no need to print separately!

Have you reviewed Helium 3 again, three new developments make it conceivable now. Once Space X gets orbital Refueling working retrieving it from the moon consistently is doable. Superconductor ribbons are testing out at 26 Tesla it was only 20 Tesla this summer, and not unthinkable to reach 30 T or even 40 T. That makes ultra small and light weight designs are going to be possible too. The last thing is 3d printing it all on one piece, possibly as small as 30 cm and as complex as a Stellarator. This could be done quickly in one material already mastered Titanium-non conductive, and Ti3Au-(Titanium/gold)-Conductive by simply sintering Titanium and inkjeting the gold on top of the sintered metal. Making complex wiring part of the print, but what has not been done yet is the superconducting ceramic in the same process, at about the same temperatures. Just over sinter and fill with a little ceramic or a little gold. Then you have a micro fusion devise with He3 direct electricity and no neutrons, no radioactive waste.

That's cool. Can you make me a bicycle frame that sells for $2000 retail?

Why comparing with steel there are other cheaper metals like auminum and alloys which can be used to save cost and weigth instead of composite. Composite do not justify here to use it instead of steel.

I call BS, 1/2 the price to produce? In the shops I managed, if you brought the print for that part, I would produce it out of steel or stainless for about $23, that mold alone cost about $100k - yea I know large quantity orders, but it comes down to the mold yield, how many parts can run through the mold. $100k divided by that number. at low volumes of 100k units, CNC machining is still cheaper and faster. - is it a better part? maybe, but that whole 1/2 price is BS

That's a $100k mold. You can just compression mold this whole thing with forged. Everything you are saying is a lie. All of Lamborghini is forged carbon.

This composite part is so not cheaper and so not faster to make. This is biased comparison design to make make that composite part look good: steel part is plain steel not an alloy and the composite part unlike steel is optimised for weight saving. If you want to be fair compare that 3D printed composite part with: 1. weight optimised alloy machined part 2. weight optimised engineering plastic machined part (with metal inserts) 3. weight optimised composite 3D printed part (with metal inserts) 4. weight optimised composite 3D forged part (with metal inserts) 5. same composite part without post processing in the compression molding This is not a revolution but a niche technology and it will stay this way

Can plastic be infinitely recycled like steel. No Stop oil