The DMLS (discrete metal laser sintered) printers by EOS industries can do all sorts of metal. I had a 3d regenativly cooled rocket motor built out of both stainless and aluminum. Not cheap, but amazing, one can build things 80% as strong as the base metal, and one can build things that would be impossible any other way.
The down side is the machine to do this is $750K My 3D stailess rocket nozzle before it was welded up and fired. http://unreasonablerocket.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-motor-has-horns.html This one was build by http://gpiprototype.com (It run h2O2 and hydrocarbon, and now has more than 25 minutes of firing time on it, and I believe it was the first 3d printed regen cooled liquid rocket motor ever fired in the world.) The aluminum version of the same thing (sorry no picture) was built by http://www.morristech.com/ I previously tried to use the low cost stainless service from shpaeways and it had issues with hollow parts and dimensional precision. On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wrote: > > >> It seems unlikely to me that anyone will be able to fabricate a cold >> fusion device at home, using 3-D printers or what-have-you. Not for the >> next thousand years or so, until those machines evolve into Clarke's >> universal replicators. >> > > Maybe 1,000 years is too much, but it will be a long while. > > There has been a lot of enthusiastic talk about these 3-D printer > replicator things. I am all for them! I think they are great. But I think > some naive commentators fail to recognize some crucial limitations to > today's versions: > > 1. They use only material. Plastic. They cannot be used to fabricate > metal, wood, silicon or nickel. You cannot make a NiCad battery or a cold > fusion device with that. > > 2. Resolution is limited. You could not make a computer chip, even if the > devices could lay down silicon and metal. I do not think resolution is fine > enough for a cold fusion device. Certainly not nanoparticle devices. > > Despite these limitations, I expect these things will become useful for > making parts in the lab such as the fitting that holds the cathode and > anode in place. > > In the distant future, the capabilities of these machines may gradually > expand, until they can lay down any element in any configuration. Such as, > for example: a fried egg, the Hope Diamond, a copy of the Mona Lisa correct > down to the molecule, or a thermonuclear bomb. That is what Clarke > predicted. By the time that happens we can hope that the machines will have > so much built-in intelligence, it will refuse to fabricate a thermonuclear > bomb. The process will be so complicated that no human will be able to > override the build-in protections, or run the machine manually. > > - Jed > >
