Comments
ryschwith t1_jde1ran wrote
I mean… their main goal was to make it past max Q because it was the rocket’s first-ever flight and they got all the way to stage separation before the second stage engine failed… All told it was a pretty successful flight.
piemelaartje t1_jde3be5 wrote
"First 3d printed rocket hits major milestone" or "one step closer to first 3d printed rocket reaching orbit". Come on, AP. Do better
[deleted] t1_jde7fpk wrote
did the layers delaminate as usual for 3d printed parts?
jdashdoubleu t1_jdea5zv wrote
Why doesn't the article make any mention of Max-Q? Why doesn't the article make any mention of what Relativity Space had to say about it, perhaps on their social media? Why does the article appear rife with language like "fails just three minutes into flight", "far short of orbit", "as it turned out, the first stage did it's job...", and "although the upper stage malfunctioned and didn't reach orbit", when there's actually major milestone, and a lot of successes you can point to from this launch event.
From Relativity Space's Twitter - "Today’s launch proved Relativity’s 3D-printed rocket technologies that will enable our next vehicle, Terran R. We successfully made it through Max-Q, the highest stress state on our printed structures. This is the biggest proof point for our novel additive manufacturing approach. Today is a huge win, with many historic firsts. We also progressed through Main Engine Cutoff and Stage Separation. We will assess flight data and provide public updates over the coming days. #GoodLuckHadFun"
Why is that the AP is framing this is a loss when this is a pretty big milestone in their work?
Is this NOT exciting!?
I think you can do better.
sifuyee t1_jdeb4bx wrote
That's very close to the mark for the primary issue in their use for launch vehicles. Since repeatability is not great for printed parts that means each piece has to be thoroughly tested before use which adds expense of its own, or risk if you don't follow a full test program. I think we will see that reliability is a challenge with their approach.
reddit455 t1_jdekuc7 wrote
>Since repeatability is not great for printed parts that means each piece has to be thoroughly tested before use which adds expense of its own, or risk if you don't follow a full test program. I think we will see that reliability is a challenge with their approach.
​
85% printed by mass, including the engines. they fuse metal powder with lasers.
​
"desktop" version
https://www.protolabs.com/services/3d-printing/direct-metal-laser-sintering/
High Resolution 0.00079 in. 20 microns
​
the only reason spaceX can turn a falcon9 around so quick is because they DO NOT need to test parts... they make many precise copies quickly.. no leaky fuel valves please.
​
SpaceX Reveals 3D-Printed Rocket Engine Parts
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/spacex-reveals-3d-printed-rocket-engine-parts
​
using direct metal laser sintering (DMLS).
​
SpaceX's first 3D-printed rocket engine part already launched on the Falcon 9 rocket in January for the THAICOM 6 mission. One of the rocket's Merlin 1D engines contained a 3D-printed main oxidizer valve (MOV) body. The valve operated correctly with high-pressure liquid oxygen, withstanding high vibration and cryogenic temperatures. The printed valve body has better strength, fracture resistance, and ductility than a part made with traditional casting, as well as lower variability in material properties. It was also a lot faster to make, being printed in two days instead of several months. The valve is now qualified to fly on all Falcon 9 flights.
​
>that reliability is a challenge with their approach.
i don't think so.. I suspect this booster is still flying.
​
March 18, 2022
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/03/spacex-booster-reuse-record-starlink/
Saturday’s mission marked the first time a Falcon 9 booster flew for a 12th time and brought the total number of Starlink satellites launched to over 2,300.
​
this is the horizontal printer that welds wires for the body components and tanks.
Relativity unveils Stargate 4th Generation metal 3D printer with horizontal printing capability
Relativity says that its new Stargate printer technology ‘defies traditional printing constraints’ by moving horizontally as it feeds multiple wires into a single print head. The company is also confident that the Stargate 4th Generation technology are capable of printing a rocket with 100x fewer parts in a matter of months, while customised software and machine learning techniques are being developed to support the printing of more complex and larger metal products.
reddit455 t1_jdelqo4 wrote
space X reuses Falcons a lot.
​
https://www.designnews.com/design-hardware-software/spacex-reveals-3d-printed-rocket-engine-parts
SpaceX's first 3D-printed rocket engine part already launched on the Falcon 9 rocket in January for the THAICOM 6 mission. One of the rocket's Merlin 1D engines contained a 3D-printed main oxidizer valve (MOV) body. The valve operated correctly with high-pressure liquid oxygen, withstanding high vibration and cryogenic temperatures. The printed valve body has better strength, fracture resistance, and ductility than a part made with traditional casting, as well as lower variability in material properties. It was also a lot faster to make, being printed in two days instead of several months. The valve is now qualified to fly on all Falcon 9 flights.
Dismal-Philosopher-4 t1_jdfbg95 wrote
No they're right since that's the truth. And investors can pull the plug any second, is the reality of it.
[deleted] t1_jdfnyi2 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jdifzh1 wrote
[removed]
sifuyee t1_jdlfkeh wrote
I helped do some testing for a company using DMLS printing of advanced materials for small rocket engines a few years back. About 1/3 of the prints would be so flawed they wouldn't even bother testing, about 1/3 of the remainder would fail to hold pressure when capped, about 10% of those that passed would fail flow test (have some obstruction) and about 8% would fail under hot fire test once they got to temperature. So, sure, you can give it a fancy brand name, but getting the secret sauce just right, is not easy nor cheap. For reference, we were producing engines aimed at the small satellite market primarily but could be used as upper stage roll thrusters, so 50-100 lbf regeneratively cooled biprops using LOx on one side and a variety of fuel options on the other.
APnews OP t1_jde0wdd wrote
A rocket made almost entirely of 3D-printed parts made its launch debut Wednesday night, lifting off amid fanfare but failing three minutes into flight — far short of orbit.
There was nothing aboard Relativity Space’s test flight except for the company’s first metal 3D print made six years ago. It was the third launch attempt from what once was a missile site. Relativity Space came within a half-second of blasting off earlier this month, with the rocket’s engines igniting before abruptly shutting down.