How 3D-Printed Parts Changed the NASCAR Cup Series (popsci.com) 40
Longtime Slashdot reader schwit1 shares a report from Popular Science: In 2021, NASCAR unveiled its Next Gen platform that included a number of rule changes from the previous iteration. Now fully symmetrical and using composite body panels instead of metal, the latest NASCAR vehicles are more like the street versions of the Chevrolet Camaro, the Ford Mustang, and the Toyota TRD Camry. Race car driving isn't an inexpensive sport, and one of the goals for the Next Gen platform was to reduce operating costs and create parity across the board. Technique Chassis, the sole chassis manufacturer for the NASCAR Cup Series, builds a modular offering in three parts. As a result, everyone is starting with the same platform, and finding a competitive advantage is in the tiniest details. One smart way to differentiate from the competition is 3D-printed parts. But this isn't your hobbyist level 3D printing.
Minnesota-based Stratasys specializes in "additive manufacturing," the process of creating an object by building it one layer at a time. Stratasys Senior Global Director of Automotive & Mobility Fadi Abro explains that this term is synonymous with 3D printing. However, the industry often reserves that description for hobby-level projects on smaller, non-industrial printers, while additive manufacturing represents robust industrial solutions. Additive manufacturing is the exact inverse of subtractive manufacturing, which requires cutting away at a solid chunk of material to achieve a final product. In art terms, additive manufacturing would be like sculpting with modeling clay while subtractive is akin to carving a shape from a block of marble. As it relates to NASCAR, Stratasys provides parts like ducts, covers, brackets, and tubing. Together with the racing organization, Stratasys reviews the current driver needs and makes recommendations for other parts and modifications. [...]
The kind of printers Stratasys builds aren't the type you buy at your local electronics store, either. Each industrial-grade 3D printer costs anywhere from $20,000 to $600,000. Using this kind of equipment isn't without precedent, and builds at SEMA's annual extravaganza feature 3D parts we wouldn't have dreamed of a few years ago. [...] In the past few months, Stratasys has been on a roll, signing an extension to its 20-year partnership with the Joe Gibbs Racing team and earning the title of "Official 3D Printing Partner of NASCAR." Competition for this market continues to heat up, however, as there are startups and legacy companies pushing hard. Around the world, 3D printing companies abound. Stratasys has one major factor on its side: 35 years of experience. What's new is that today's printing is more accurate, it's faster, the materials are more robust, Abro says. "I think what's changed drastically over the past five to seven years has been all about material development," Abro explains. "We're seeing materials that are just incredible, whether it's how resistant to heat they are or how strong they are compared to how much they weigh."
"It's better, faster, cheaper. It's faster to print something than to mill it, and then it's certainly cheaper in a multitude of different ways. Number one, there's not as much skill required for 3D printing as there is in CNC machining; you need a more traditional manufacturing method."
Minnesota-based Stratasys specializes in "additive manufacturing," the process of creating an object by building it one layer at a time. Stratasys Senior Global Director of Automotive & Mobility Fadi Abro explains that this term is synonymous with 3D printing. However, the industry often reserves that description for hobby-level projects on smaller, non-industrial printers, while additive manufacturing represents robust industrial solutions. Additive manufacturing is the exact inverse of subtractive manufacturing, which requires cutting away at a solid chunk of material to achieve a final product. In art terms, additive manufacturing would be like sculpting with modeling clay while subtractive is akin to carving a shape from a block of marble. As it relates to NASCAR, Stratasys provides parts like ducts, covers, brackets, and tubing. Together with the racing organization, Stratasys reviews the current driver needs and makes recommendations for other parts and modifications. [...]
The kind of printers Stratasys builds aren't the type you buy at your local electronics store, either. Each industrial-grade 3D printer costs anywhere from $20,000 to $600,000. Using this kind of equipment isn't without precedent, and builds at SEMA's annual extravaganza feature 3D parts we wouldn't have dreamed of a few years ago. [...] In the past few months, Stratasys has been on a roll, signing an extension to its 20-year partnership with the Joe Gibbs Racing team and earning the title of "Official 3D Printing Partner of NASCAR." Competition for this market continues to heat up, however, as there are startups and legacy companies pushing hard. Around the world, 3D printing companies abound. Stratasys has one major factor on its side: 35 years of experience. What's new is that today's printing is more accurate, it's faster, the materials are more robust, Abro says. "I think what's changed drastically over the past five to seven years has been all about material development," Abro explains. "We're seeing materials that are just incredible, whether it's how resistant to heat they are or how strong they are compared to how much they weigh."
"It's better, faster, cheaper. It's faster to print something than to mill it, and then it's certainly cheaper in a multitude of different ways. Number one, there's not as much skill required for 3D printing as there is in CNC machining; you need a more traditional manufacturing method."
If you are not first (Score:3)
Say what? (Score:1)
Clearly someone didn't do their editor work because racing is hugely expensive. Thus, the reason for this article.
Re: (Score:3)
That is a double negative. Isn't = is not, inexpensive = not expensive. Is not not expensive = is expensive.
Re: (Score:1)
I imagine OP was saying that the phrase 'isn't inexpensive' has the connotation that it is minorly expensive, whereas NASCAR racing is a multi-million dollar sport.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, NASCAR is relatively inexpensive compared to other racing, like Formula 1.
NASCAR: ~$15M/year
F1: $135M/year.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, NASCAR is relatively inexpensive compared to other racing, like Formula 1. NASCAR: ~$15M/year F1: $135M/year.
What a waste. That money should go to feed starving children with cleft palates.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Say what? (Score:4, Insightful)
Clearly someone didn't have their coffee yet.
Re:Say what? (Score:5, Informative)
Race car driving isn't an inexpensive sport,
Clearly someone didn't do their editor work because racing is hugely expensive. Thus, the reason for this article.
I imagine NASCAR, compared to say F1 is going to be on the cheap end of the scale. I mean an F1 car has to take right hand turns.
A quick google (so yeah, completely scientific) suggests a Nascar car is about US$500,000 to produce. Red Bull's 2024 F1 car was US$15 Million each with teams in 2024 limited to a maximum budget of US$135 million for materials.
I get that NASCAR is a modified production car whilst F1 is bespoke... but a 2024 WRC (rally) car cost a cool Million Euros (so just over a million USD) and they're usually a highly modified version of a production car. I dare say, for a top level professional racing league, it's pretty damn cheap.
Re: (Score:3)
I get that NASCAR is a modified production car whilst F1 is bespoke...
NASCAR hasn't used production cars in decades. The cars are a single chassis design, made by a single manufacturer. They use decals for the headlights, grilles, etc, to create a superficial resemblance to production models. The mechanical differences are only in minor tuning changes, suspension setup, etc, to meet each driver's preferences. The expensive R&D is long gone.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want something closer to stock cars, look at GT racing. Those cars are based on cars you can actually buy (if you have enough money).
Then, there are races with stock cars. Single-make races are a good example.
You can get into racing for not a whole lot of money. You won't be winning a lot but you'll have fun and learn. A good platform is the MX 5/Miata. You can throw in a cage and race at a higher level but there are races where you don't even need a cage. You will need a helmet but, again, some race
Re: (Score:2)
> Nascar car is about US$500,000 to produce
Which reveals NASCAR as utter bullshit anyway. Seeing as the "SC" in the acronym stands for "Stock Car," that is exactly what they should be: cars bought from a dealer's stock. Go ahead and and add the roll cage and whatever safety equipment you like. Mod the engine for more power if you like. But in both cases, keep the car street-legal in all respects. Do that, and then NASCAR will cease to be a complete fraud and might actually be worth watching (Well, n
Alternative meaning to stock... (Score:2)
While the cars are no longer actual production vehicles modified for racing, they're still "stock" in the sense that all the drivers get essentially the same car, with the allowed modifications being very minor. Making it less about budget and car tuning, and at least theoretically, more about the driver's abilities.
I kind of agree with you on the tracks though. If it is going to be about driver skill rather than the engineering team, make it take more skill, more complex tracks.
F1 allows you to put in a
Re: (Score:2)
Hopscotch is an inexpensive sport
Racing million dollar cars isn't an inexpensive sport
See the difference?
Re: (Score:2)
Race car driving isn't an inexpensive sport,
Clearly someone didn't do their editor work because racing is hugely expensive. Thus, the reason for this article.
What is significant here is that apparently multiple people had read the summary, or at least the first few sentences, before replying.
Re: Say What (Score:3)
Wow is there a coffee shortage this morning? Seriously guys??
Re: (Score:1)
Reading headlines isn't a dumb person's sport.
Overselling. (Score:1)
As always, 'it depends.' I think the biggest false claims here are the time and skill aspect. It doesn't take more skill to CNC a part than it does to 3d print one, its just a different skillset. Even if you don't know G-code inside and out, modern CAD/CAM software will do it all for you as long as you set up the parameters correctly. Same deal with 3d printing. If you can model it and know your software, you can make it.
As for time, there's almost nothing you'd make on a CNC mill that would be faster
Re: (Score:2)
I think the skillset for CNC is more expensive than that for a 3D Printer.
Source: https://cncmachinist.net/salary/ [cncmachinist.net]
CNC machines cost anywhere from $200,000 and up, although many are over $500,000. 6-axis machines and larger industrial machining centers can be $250,000 to $500,000, as well.
Source: https://info.lagunatools.com/how-much-is-a-cnc-machine-buying-guide/ [lagunatools.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Those are tools, not skills.
Re: (Score:2)
My first link was to the average salary of a CNC Machinist.
Re: (Score:2)
As always, 'it depends.' I think the biggest false claims here are the time and skill aspect. It doesn't take more skill to CNC a part than it does to 3d print one, its just a different skillset. Even if you don't know G-code inside and out, modern CAD/CAM software will do it all for you as long as you set up the parameters correctly. Same deal with 3d printing. If you can model it and know your software, you can make it.
As for time, there's almost nothing you'd make on a CNC mill that would be faster to 3d print. 3d printing is incredibly useful for small runs of complex parts, fitment testing and prototyping, and parts that are just geometrically impossible to make using traditional methods. Exactly the kind of things a competitive racing team would need in a lot of cases. If you just need a bracket with a hole pattern on it? There's no way you're doing that faster with 3d printer than I am with a CNC mill. If you need thousands of something? Traditional manufacturing is still king.
Hit this poster with insightful, mods. In some ways, the CNC and 3D printing are related, but definitely a different skill.
Do you know if there is any data on relative strength of the differently manufactured parts?
Re: (Score:2)
These are just ultimately machines that take a model and covert it to a physical item that matches the choices made by the designer, a ton of the choices are made for simplicity in either field unless one discovers they need to optimize.
Anyone who can use Fusion can make quality parts in
Re: (Score:2)
No No No. 3d printing (additive), CNC welding (additive) CNC Machining (subtractive) , Waterjet Cutting (subtractive) Same field, neither is full of unknowns with what is affordable to load in either type of machine.
But are the two the two parts physically identical to the eye, metallurgically identical?
Re:Overselling. (Score:4, Informative)
As usual, it depends, but 3D printing can be very fast, especially if the parts are small
Firstly, there's no stock preparation and clamping. For a lot of stuff, my Prusa mk4 is almost no work. I'm impressed how much easier 3D printing has become in the last decade. Most of my hard won skills are obsolete, frankly.
Milling is definitely more of a faff, but as for speed, again it depends. For some shapes you might need to hog off a bunch of stuff, compared to 3D printing which might only need to deposit a little. Then again, one designs parts for the tool, so if I'm printing, I'll remove excess material to speed the print, but for milling one might leave those bits in to avoid unnecessarily removing material.
Many parts are under an hour for me, and I'm not generally printing in speed mode, preferring a smaller layer height. Plus there are no chips to clean, about the most that needs doing is an occasional wipe down of the bed with IPA.
And again for the bracket, it depends. Half of my brackets are sheet metal cut with a cold chisel, drilled on a cheese grade pillar drill and bent in a vise. The rest are 3D printed. Some would likely be faster in a CNC, some are for just obnoxious parts with inexplicably irritating mounting options, and becomes a question of can I bodge this rando part onto a rando DIN rail clip.
But also modern 3D printing is way easier than machining. It's reached the kind of level where for basic to mid stuff you barely need any skills or knowledge and is great for beginners. And 3D printers won't generally destroy anything of you mess up. Maybe CNC milling has got better but I'd hesitate to let a complete beginner just have a go on a mill with no guidance.
Re: Overselling. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends what you mean by "matter". SLS definitely has a textured finish, so for things like threads or surfaces that need to be flat you might have a finishing pass of tapping or skimming the surface. It's not really an either/or proposition.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm talking about surfaces that need to be flat, places where bearings seat, that sort of thing. You need to machine those, just as you would with good old-fashioned casting. My point is that 3D printing won't be the death of machining for a long while yet. You don't need teams of machinists making finished parts from blanks one by one, but thanks to CNC that hasn't been the case for years anyway.
As you say, printing is fine for low-end things, but you're not going to hit "Print" and have, say, a crankshaft
Re: (Score:2)
I would necessarily characterize it as low end. I gather it's pretty popular in the rocket industry: you can print deeply complex shapes made out of inconel that perform better than anything you could reasonably machine from scratch.
Wouldn't a crankshaft be forged rather than milled anyway?
Anyway have you seen the videos of the latest ceramic end mills hogging off large amounts of inconel? Very impressive, the tool runs at a constant dull red glow. Apparently one end mill costs thousands.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't a crankshaft be forged rather than milled anyway?
I think crankshafts get a little bit of everything: cast for general shape, turned to rough dimension, forged for strength/hardness, ground to final dimension, milled for things like keyways and drilled for things like oil paths.
I haven't seen those ceramic tools to be honest but I certainly wouldn't want to be the one to break one just because my g-code had the decimal point in the wrong place.
Re: (Score:2)
https://youtu.be/9t4ke40fhvk?s... [youtu.be]
Check out out it's wild.
Apparently flood coolant came keep up enough with the speeds and feeds, and with the stop and go Marie of the cut causes too much thermal cycling of the tool which damages it. So I read the ceramic tools do better with red heat than thermal cycling.
Re: (Score:2)
As always, 'it depends.' I think the biggest false claims here are the time and skill aspect. It doesn't take more skill to CNC a part than it does to 3d print one, its just a different skillset.
And you could not be more wrong.
When you CNC something, you have to consider what cutting it does to strength remaining material to be cut. Basically, if you made a wall too thin then it will be too flimsy to CNC correctly. With things like powder bed SLS, it doesn't matter because the heat aligns the molecular structure to be makes it a single part and is thus stronger overall leading to even fewer shaping restrictions.
This isn't a niche fact point either because "infill" is commonly used in 3d printing t
Re: (Score:2)
Titanium alloy components (Score:2)
One thing they left out is that by utilizing 3d printing that the parts can easily be made out of titanium alloys.
Why not other methods because other shaping options are not as precise and titanium is notorious for being difficult to work with.
* CNC: limits on the geometries, even with 6D CNC
* Casting/molding: limited geometries/100% infill where it may not be desired
* Laser cut: limited to 2d geometry and parts have reduced strength due to the material flow
* Pressing: limited geometries and titanium alloys
3D Printing is handy, but metal helps protect you. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's the thing. When you're buying a $600k metal printer, it can be for structural things. At that price point, you have a system that can 3D print fully functional rifle barrels, that should not wear any faster than traditionally crafted ones. Not to mention every other metal part in the firearm.
Let's talk Nascar (Score:2)
I am actually a fan of the sport and the series along with F1, Indy, and endurance (WEC, IMSA). I don't know what motivated this post.
Nascar has gone composite body with Gen 7 taking them further away from native production cars. There are 3 manufacturers: Fort, Chevy and Toyota. The bodies are similar, might be small differences. The engines have some differences only someone deep in the sport might know.
The only relationship to street cars is they still sit on the left side of the car and there is a 3rd p