Staples introduces 3D printer kiosk - Page 2

egor20 · December 5, 2012, 10:30 PM

The idea of using a 3-D printer to create a gun is controversial and interesting, but it seems to still be a ways off from equaling the quality of machined parts. A gun with a major part printed that way failed after just six shots when some enthusiasts decided to give the tech a try.

Creating a printable gun is the project of Defense Distributed, which is working on what it calls the WikiWeapon. But the effort isn't far enough along to create a working firearm, so Defense Distributed used a design created by another printed-gun creator who goes by the name HaveBlue.

HaveBlue claimed in July to have fired his printed gun hundreds of times, which doesn't seem impossible given the quality of the printing. The part printed by the group is called the lower receiver, which is where a round is received from the magazine. Pictures show it to be very well made, and it appears to fit exactly to the other parts in the gun kit they used.

But the pressure of the recoil appears to have been too much for the "buffer ring," which separates the stock from the upper receiver. After firing just six shots, the gun split in two. It's a serious setback, especially considering they were firing a lower-caliber cartridge than the gun would normally shoot.
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/fu...part-1C7404226

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=wuDCW_Rn5JI

johnwilliamson062 · December 5, 2012, 11:23 PM

5.7 isn't that far behind 223.

Onward Allusion · December 6, 2012, 12:08 AM

Rather than printing an AR receiver outright, couldn't one print a mold for investment casting instead? Much less reliant on the polymer materials. Strictly theory, of course.

FrankenMauser · December 6, 2012, 03:00 AM

Yes, you could.

However, it would be just as easy to have an investment casting company 3D-print the mold for you, with one of their wax or green sand printers. Or... just have them cast the receivers.

I'm all for doing something myself, and I do see myself using 3D printing for prototyping very soon. ...but we're not quite to the point that receivers can be affordably printed in a usable state.

iraiam · December 6, 2012, 06:26 AM

If it is possible to build a gun or parts reliably and cheaply with this method, I am sure someone will go into legitemate business doing it and we won't need Staples 3d printers.

johnwilliamson062 · December 7, 2012, 12:19 AM

I doubt anyone will be using this technology to manufacture firearms for mass retail sale. PIM is definitely a better process for that and I don't see this catching up in that regard even as this technology improves, but...

I think the injection mold press used for the AR lowers probably runs about $250,000, based on my limited knowledge of injection molding and guesses as to pressure and mold size. The mold then costs $35,000 for a "cheap" aluminum mold. Then look at EPA requirements for the operation, infrastructure requirements, etc. Especially power.

If you want to build one yourself, and many do, this option is a whole lot more attractive.

Making a model and then a casting is an interesting option. I wonder how a glass lower would handle 22lr..

JimPage · December 7, 2012, 09:33 AM

Check out this attempt to make one.

http://www.dailytech.com/3D+Printed+...ticle29339.htm

December 5, 2012, 10:30 PM	#26
egor20 Senior Member Join Date: November 14, 2010 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 1,824	The idea of using a 3-D printer to create a gun is controversial and interesting, but it seems to still be a ways off from equaling the quality of machined parts. A gun with a major part printed that way failed after just six shots when some enthusiasts decided to give the tech a try. Creating a printable gun is the project of Defense Distributed, which is working on what it calls the WikiWeapon. But the effort isn't far enough along to create a working firearm, so Defense Distributed used a design created by another printed-gun creator who goes by the name HaveBlue. HaveBlue claimed in July to have fired his printed gun hundreds of times, which doesn't seem impossible given the quality of the printing. The part printed by the group is called the lower receiver, which is where a round is received from the magazine. Pictures show it to be very well made, and it appears to fit exactly to the other parts in the gun kit they used. But the pressure of the recoil appears to have been too much for the "buffer ring," which separates the stock from the upper receiver. After firing just six shots, the gun split in two. It's a serious setback, especially considering they were firing a lower-caliber cartridge than the gun would normally shoot. http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/fu...part-1C7404226 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=wuDCW_Rn5JI __________________ Chief stall mucker and grain chef Country don't mean dumb. Steven King. The Stand

December 6, 2012, 12:08 AM	#28
Onward Allusion Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2009 Location: Back in a Non-Free State Posts: 3,133	Rather than printing an AR receiver outright, couldn't one print a mold for investment casting instead? Much less reliant on the polymer materials. Strictly theory, of course. __________________ Simple as ABC . . . Always Be Carrying

December 6, 2012, 03:00 AM	#29
FrankenMauser Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Location: In the valley above the plain Posts: 13,421	Yes, you could. However, it would be just as easy to have an investment casting company 3D-print the mold for you, with one of their wax or green sand printers. Or... just have them cast the receivers. I'm all for doing something myself, and I do see myself using 3D printing for prototyping very soon. ...but we're not quite to the point that receivers can be affordably printed in a usable state. __________________ Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

December 6, 2012, 06:26 AM	#30
iraiam Senior Member Join Date: September 6, 2012 Location: Lakewood, CO Posts: 1,057	If it is possible to build a gun or parts reliably and cheaply with this method, I am sure someone will go into legitemate business doing it and we won't need Staples 3d printers. __________________ NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason

December 7, 2012, 09:33 AM	#32
JimPage Senior Member Join Date: February 21, 2010 Location: Rome, NY Posts: 941	Check out this attempt to make one. http://www.dailytech.com/3D+Printed+...ticle29339.htm __________________ Jim Page Cogito, ergo armatum sum

December 5, 2012, 11:23 PM	#27
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	5.7 isn't that far behind 223.

December 7, 2012, 12:19 AM	#31
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	I doubt anyone will be using this technology to manufacture firearms for mass retail sale. PIM is definitely a better process for that and I don't see this catching up in that regard even as this technology improves, but... I think the injection mold press used for the AR lowers probably runs about $250,000, based on my limited knowledge of injection molding and guesses as to pressure and mold size. The mold then costs $35,000 for a "cheap" aluminum mold. Then look at EPA requirements for the operation, infrastructure requirements, etc. Especially power. If you want to build one yourself, and many do, this option is a whole lot more attractive. Making a model and then a casting is an interesting option. I wonder how a glass lower would handle 22lr..

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search