Originally shared by 3DLT.com
In this new blog article we make the case for why auto parts stores should offer 3D printing services. What’s your take?
Could 3D printing give automotive aftermarket retailers access to new products while helping them fend off competition and simplify their supply chain?
#3D #3dprinting #retail #automotive
http://blog.3dlt.com/?p=1884
You know what would make me want to go to auto parts store? CNC mills and plasma cutters. Give me thd ability to make custom replacement parts or modified parts, and you got me.
Cheap plastic parts broken? Jeep’s window regulator piece that would cost $300 to replace the whole thing with more cheap plastic? Measure and mill it out of 6040 aluminum, good for life!
I’m sure the cost of the machines and materials pretty easily outweigh the hypothetical savings in inventory and transportation. Assuming a significant number of functionally equivalent parts could even be produced on printers (which they can’t). Maybe in a few decades when printers have improved and started making progress into the large-scale manufacturing process.
You would definitely want to go with metal laser sintering but I think this is absolutely valid and a great case was made. I disagree with @Dale_Dunn that functionally equivalent parts can’t be made on 3D printers. The NASA rocket tests show high pressure and temps with commercial laser sintering tech. In addition, is this idea that most parts are “multi-material”. Most replacement parts are not multi-material. The final component may have rubber gaskets, plastic, and metal components, but each of these components can be replaced. This is a compelling and well-derived piece that has application across several verticals.
@Chris_Reyes NASA’s nozzle plate is an example of creating an exotic, low-volume part that is fantastically expensive using previous methods (and still not exactly cheap). Laser sintering is just not cost-effective compared to mass-production processes. For the price of 10 laser-sintered aluminum parts, you could probably get 1000 die cast parts. Those parts still need precision machining before they can be bolted on. That’s just not going to be cost effective at the local store. We’re talking millions of dollars of equipment plus skilled labor to run them. And we’re still assuming that the purchased component is not an assembly of several close-fitting pieces of different materials.
Then there’s the waiting time. When I’m wrenching on a car, I need the part right away, not hours later. If I have to wait for a local machine to print, processing to finished dimensions and cosmetic finishing (and maybe wait in line for that), I may as well just order the real thing from an on-line warehouse.
You make a very valid point about the precision finish that I was not aware. You either have to go into a vertical where such precision finishes are not a requirement or only products where it is not necessary. The savings come from inventory, shipping, and the machining necessary to create the die-cast or injection-moulded parts. Perhaps the question is how large is that untapped market and how much these stores want to leave that on the table.
Having a gasket printer would be phenomenal. Or even a gasket cutter.
Constrained requirements for a part type that is both similar between types & brands but unique between models.
The process is quick enough that people would be willing to wait in the store for the part(s) to be produced yet perfectly capable of being ordered online for in-store pickup (Think digital photo lab).
And the traditional parts occupy a lot of space on the shelf. Stock the most common ones or the ones your equipment can’t produce, and you can print/cut all the rest of the gaskets ever made!