短期内5-10年内不一定是好投资方向，和你之前的Hydrogen Fuel Cell system 一样：
政府做做R&D, 科研补贴还可以， PE 投大钱想要有多大回报，请三思~~
----- 不是你有作业要做，出来钓鱼吧 - 哈哈-------
1. Currently, 3D printing is good for for fast prototyping, saving tooling cost,
2. For serious structural parts, for high-speed rotational speed -- no commericial use.
3. Metal 3D printing has a lot of issues to solve.
What you put out as "proof" was like -- early phase work, NASA readiness level 3, 5 at best.
Spending $1B, saved $70K :-- ) and still not fully proved.
For printing kitech tools, toys, 3D printer could be perfect :), BUT too expensive to be commercial viable??
For militatry use- weapons, 3D manufacturing/printing maybe ok, because the life time is a few minutes max, and cost is not an issue -- heard about $1000 coffee mug, correct? 3D printed Mug would be very cool, indeed, 3D printer would be good for coffee cups :)
For commericial use -- like a jet engine/gas turbine power system, life requirement for system could be 40K - 80 K hours, which is continuously running (24 x 7) for 5 years-10 years; life of components would be ~ 20K hours.
You really think the current 3D printer will generate that kind of parts -- precision/tolerance, heat treatment, etc..
“Now, in Germany, MTU Aero Engines will begin mass 3D printing nickel alloy borescope bosses for Airbus’s A320neo jetliner, as the company aims to reduce fuel consumption by 15% with new upgrades.”
“The race is on to bring industrial 3D printing into mainstream manufacturing, beginning with the aerospace sector. In the U.S., GE has launched its own mass 3D printing facility for the production of its 3D printed fuel nozzles. Now, in Germany, MTU Aero Engines will begin mass 3D printing nickel alloy borescope bosses for Airbus’s A320neo jetliner, as the company aims to reduce fuel consumption by 15% with new upgrades.”
短期内5-10年内不一定是好投资方向，和你之前的Hydrogen Fuel Cell system 一样：
政府做做R&D, 科研补贴还可以， PE 投大钱想要有多大回报，请三思~~
----- 不是你有作业要做，出来钓鱼吧 - 哈哈-------
1. Currently, 3D printing is good for for fast prototyping, saving tooling cost,
2. For serious structural parts, for high-speed rotational speed -- no commericial use.
3. Metal 3D printing has a lot of issues to solve.
What you put out as "proof" was like -- early phase work, NASA readiness level 3, 5 at best.
Spending $1B, saved $70K :-- ) and still not fully proved.
For printing kitech tools, toys, 3D printer could be perfect :), BUT too expensive to be commercial viable??
For militatry use- weapons, 3D manufacturing/printing maybe ok, because the life time is a few minutes max, and cost is not an issue -- heard about $1000 coffee mug, correct? 3D printed Mug would be very cool, indeed, 3D printer would be good for coffee cups :)
For commericial use -- like a jet engine/gas turbine power system, life requirement for system could be 40K - 80 K hours, which is continuously running (24 x 7) for 5 years-10 years; life of components would be ~ 20K hours.
You really think the current 3D printer will generate that kind of parts -- precision/tolerance, heat treatment, etc..
3D printers & raw material supplies？
....
https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/preparations-begun-on-mass-metal-3d-printing-of-airbus-engine-parts-50618/
“Now, in Germany, MTU Aero Engines will begin mass 3D printing nickel alloy borescope bosses for Airbus’s A320neo jetliner, as the company aims to reduce fuel consumption by 15% with new upgrades.”
https://www.ge.com/additive/stories/transformation-3d-printing-how-walnut-sized-fuel-nozzle-changed-way-ge-aviation-builds-jet
https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/preparations-begun-on-mass-metal-3d-printing-of-airbus-engine-parts-50618/
“The race is on to bring industrial 3D printing into mainstream manufacturing, beginning with the aerospace sector. In the U.S., GE has launched its own mass 3D printing facility for the production of its 3D printed fuel nozzles. Now, in Germany, MTU Aero Engines will begin mass 3D printing nickel alloy borescope bosses for Airbus’s A320neo jetliner, as the company aims to reduce fuel consumption by 15% with new upgrades.”
https://www.ge.com/additive/stories/transformation-3d-printing-how-walnut-sized-fuel-nozzle-changed-way-ge-aviation-builds-jet
https://www.thestreet.com/stocks/cathie-wood-sinks-1-8-million-into-struggling-ultra-cheap-tech-stock
https://www.ge.com/news/reports/future-manufacturing-take-look-inside-factory-3d-printing-jet-engine-parts
地球圆的或方的问题其实还不如这个话题搞清楚重要。
https://www.ge.com/news/reports/future-manufacturing-take-look-inside-factory-3d-printing-jet-engine-parts
怎么觉得有点 滑稽。
看看下头我问她美国制造业的竞争力在哪里，她东一榔头西一棒子。
美国有3D打印生产某些东西有什么神奇，别的工业国也会，你没有竞争优势，会什么除了在自己贸易壁垒下苟延残喘，没有什么闪光的可能。
北电，思科等这就样完蛋的，亲手把命脉技术交给他人，断了自己的长远生路。欧美傻CEO们加上政客制定的经济政策就是赶走制造业到外国的，CEO看的是短期公司是否有利润，长期他们会走人才不管呢，政客看的是能不能骗来选票，低层福利才不管企业能不能长期获利，赶出美国完事。除了工会，垄断控制或军工等关键企业外， 相当比例都这样。电车特斯拉等，车电池或3D设备企业也往这方向上走。
几小时或几天，大幅度缩短了供应链的时间和空间。从此制造业再也不一样了。
https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_20956072
没谁有什么明显的优势。中国的优势在规模，成本，和大量可试制对比的方面。美国在于有高成本的东西可以推动3D打印的应用。但是谁都压不倒谁。