3D Printed Train parts

[Entertexthere]

"On the 24th September 2019, Angel Trains, 3D printing leader Stratasys, DB ESG and Chiltern announced they will be trialling the first 3D printed parts to be used on a train in the UK."

"These parts include four-passenger armrests and seven grab handles, which have been installed on Chiltern Railways trains" (Which from the picture looks like a Class 168.)

The article I found this information from (RailAdvent) seemed to use both past and present tense, claiming that they were "to trial the first 3D printed parts ever used on an in-service passenger train in the UK" yet at the same time it goes on about the trial's success and "how it'll be trialled on GWR services next". So could we potentially be seeing 3D-printed armrests in regular use on trains in about 5 years time?

 

[matacaster]

Perhaps this technology will eventually make it possible to keep the interior of trains in a better condition. Northern's 142's could have done with all sorts of new interior fittings many years ago to make them presentable.

 

[Nick Ashwell]

I'm amazed it's not happened already, the RAF had 3D printed parts flying on Tornados a fair few years ago (2014 IIRC)

 

[supervc-10]

The question with 3D printing parts is normally not whether you can do it, but whether it's worth doing. For extremely short runs it usually is, but make more than just a few pieces, and it's usually not worth using 3D printing. Exceptions exist- for example in very weight sensitive applications. A friend of mine has done work on 3D printing parts for spacecraft, for example, where the weight savings come above production costs.

 

[Entertexthere]

The question with 3D printing parts is normally not whether you can do it, but whether it's worth doing. For extremely short runs it usually is, but make more than just a few pieces, and it's usually not worth using 3D printing. Exceptions exist- for example in very weight sensitive applications. A friend of mine has done work on 3D printing parts for spacecraft, for example, where the weight savings come above production costs.

I think that it would probably end up being practical on small fleets like the class 230s, but now for large classes of large units like the class 390. It would definitely be useful for cases when replacements need to be sourced quickly (just one or two missing handles) but it's not that often to find people nicking train handles!

 

[Nick Ashwell]

And you'd hope that any long production run would include enough spares for the expected life of that component! What I really mean is in the grand scheme of things is say ordering an extra 50% of armrests so you don't have to get more molded at a later date and can be sourced cheaper per piece due to said increased production run!

 

[w1bbl3]

There is a trade show on currently for digital / additive manufacturing and the machine vendor Stratasys obviously wants to highlight that they have the only rail vehicle interior approved resin...
DB ESG are the producer of the parts as per this press release from 2018 https://dbesg.deutschebahn.com/esg/...ohl-for-network-rail-3537054?contentId=511524

This aside there is a really useful purpose to trailing this for the manufacture of replacements for very old parts where the intended life and thus additional stocks ordered at the outset have been depleted. The original manufacturer from 10+ years ago may well have gone out of business, discarded the tooling or no longer have machinery that the tooling could be used with, so a straight forward reorder isn't possible.

This currently requires new tooling to be commissioned and a suitably large/economic order placed to achieve a reasonable unit cost, for stock that may only have five years of life left this isn't viable.

 

[TwistedMentat]

This aside there is a really useful purpose to trailing this for the manufacture of replacements for very old parts where the intended life and thus additional stocks ordered at the outset have been depleted. The original manufacturer from 10+ years ago may well have gone out of business, discarded the tooling or no longer have machinery that the tooling could be used with, so a straight forward reorder isn't possible.

This currently requires new tooling to be commissioned and a suitably large/economic order placed to achieve a reasonable unit cost, for stock that may only have five years of life left this isn't viable.

Yup, that's where the killer feature will be for industry. Especially as the process and costs improve. I could even imagine a point where train owners require the 3D CAD models in case they're needed later and the OEM has left the industry for whatever reason.

And as the metal stuff improves I could even see it becoming a thing for the smaller run exterior equipment.