Thanks for the laugh.

Some parts lend themselves to additive manufacturing, others to subtractive manufacturing (i.e. machining), some extrusion, molding, etc. ... my point is, just because you can make it with additive manufacturing does not actually mean it is the best way to make the part. You use the right tool for the job, mmkay

The benefits of AM have been covered in this thread already (rapid prototyping, unique geometry not possible to manufacture with other techniques, etc.), and a lot of it's inherent limitations (although many have not even been brought up ...). There probably is not a lot of printing of cassettes for rapid prototyping purposes ...

Nope, I am right about this one. Don't get so cocky. I'm not talking about not much strength like ABS plastic. I'm talking about like machined from a cast block instead of cold forged. In other words the basic characteristics of steel would handle the stresses. Just ordinary fused steel powder would have plenty of strength to handle the stresses without special treatment. Cold forging or cold working, etc. wouldn't be required to enhance the strength. Don't forget aluminum works fine for a cassette except with regard to wear. As we like to say on the 41, it doesn't asplode when you drope the hamer. What it does is wear rapidly from abrasion. A printed steel cassette couldn't be any worse than that. Hence my comment.

Use Ti.

And then there's that.

I've seen plenty of metal printed parts, they do not come out with a very good finish, which is fine for some pieces, but for a cog you don't want rough surfaces. If you printed a cog you're going to need machining just to get a decent finish, so why not just machine it in the first place? If you left it unmachined it's going to act like a grinding stone on your chain, and I can't see that lasting all that long before a failure ...

Ok, I think I'm still following. Fork is a bad idea. Seat bag is ok. But what I should do is see if he can use the metal printer and make me a one piece Wheelset?

Good question. Assuming a normal look and design, not a very good idea. Spoke tension would not be adjustable. Also spoke material would not be strengthened by drawing and cold working. I wouldn't trust it. I think such a wheel would be dead, no spring or liveliness.

... My point was there are techniques for manufacturing standard parts ... additive manufacturing has capabilities that are unique, and it is best used for applications that exploit those capabilities. Think parts that can NOT be manufactured using standard techniques:













The other use is for rapid prototyping of parts that would later be manufactured using traditional methods. For example designing a steering wheel on the computer, printing it out to see how it feels in your hands, making a few changes to the part, laser scanning it, updating computer model, print, re-iterate until satisfied with results, send new model off for production ...

There are plenty of novel parts to manufacturer that would be interesting to see produced, and be beneficial to cycling. Plenty of mounts/attachments/accessories, and with additive manufacturing you could explore some really interesting designs. No structural part on the bike should be explored with your level of engineering experience or knowledge.