Right--specialized, low-volume production fits into the present state of AM:
"Since 3-D printing is best suited for production runs of 50,000 units or less, it may find a niche in making parts that have low demand — for instance, for a trim part on a 12-year-old vehicle."
Not this:
"Hi, Mark. Thank you very much for taking my question. I want to switch gears for a moment and ask you this. I'm a automobile entrepreneur and I just started a company that makes wheels or rims for automobiles, it's called Rims World and I'm one of about 20 delivering companies that make rims or wheels for automobiles.
This is a $2.9 billion a year business, most wheels are made in China, they are made out of high quality aluminum, they are cast, but the problem in the manufacturing process is that once you have made a mold and faces. When you start crunching these wheels, you start making these wheels, they have to go through a quality inspection and there is a tremendous amount of waste more than 5% to 10% of whatever is coming out of the mould."
Casting is whole heck of a lot faster than AM--sounds as if the rim-making process variables are not optimized, if they have such a high scrap rate.
Also, If AM were at present a cost-effective way of producing the entire GE nozzle they'd be doing so, instead of just using AM for the most intricate interior portions of it, and using a forging for the base and a casting to connect the base to the injector.
Finally, the nozzle is much smaller (volume, dimensions, mass) than any rim.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
