11
$\begingroup$

I know some of the components at SpaceX are manufactured using metal additive manufacturing (3D printing), but how much of the entire Falcon 9 launch vehicle or Dragon capsule is made up of printed components? Obviously there are more sensible techniques for manufacturing parts like thin-walled panels, but how much of the vehicle could potentially be 3D printed? How about an entire engine?

Note this question is regarding all variants of the Falcon 9 and Dragon capsule, and I also welcome any relevant information about test hardware like the Grasshopper.

For example, the SuperDraco engine block shown below was manufactured with 3D printing (see this article for some more information).

enter image description here

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Dragonfly, the manned Dragon vehicle is probably a good test vehicle to include. $\endgroup$
    – geoffc
    Dec 20, 2015 at 3:02
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ GE has managed to 3D print a jet engine. Yes, it was a toy "demo" project, but jet engines are much much more complex than rocket engines. $\endgroup$
    – Deer Hunter
    Dec 21, 2015 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ As far as I've seen in publications, the SuperDraco combustion chamber + nozzle is the largest 3D printed part in the stack. By weight, 3D printed parts make up a tiny proportion of the vehicle. $\endgroup$
    – Hobbes
    May 13, 2018 at 10:37

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
7
$\begingroup$

Additive manufacturing has a high payoff for complex parts that are hard or impossible to machine using traditional methods, however, the process often requires significant trial and error to get correct and getting consistent material properties on the finished part and precision are difficult. For these reasons it's generally only advantageous to do with complex parts that can tolerate the precision and material property variations and that typically for launch vehicles means limiting it to the engines. Structural pieces have strength requirements that don't tolerate material voids well. Mechanisms typically need both consistent strength and precision in critical locations. Engine components that don't move, or at least that don't need super tight precision, can all be printed.

The company I work for, Parabilis, just tested an entire engine (RCS thruster) that was printed as a single unit http://sbir.gsfc.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/15/sbir/phase1/SBIR-15-1-H2.01-9296.html
The folks at Rocket Labs USA are similarly 3D printing pretty much the entire main engine of their vehicle with the exception of things like pneumatics and valves due to the precision sealing needed there. https://www.rocketlabusa.com/about-us/propulsion/

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! I hadn't considered the variations in material properties. So that must affect the damage tolerance and expected lifetime of a part too? (Impacting reusability?) $\endgroup$
    – Brian Lynch
    Jan 31, 2016 at 7:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Absolutely, since these techniques are so new there's still a lot of testing to do to ensure the designs are robust enough for each particular use and good quality control techniques are developed. $\endgroup$
    – Sifu Yee
    Feb 1, 2016 at 5:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.