During the Artemis II mission they announced it’s likely in 2028 when they actually land on the moon they will bring a 3d printer along so they can print the tools they need while building a moon base.
Firstly, this is very cool to hear. Thoughts? 
Second, I strongly feel they will be Bambu printers because they will need something reliable and easy to use. Opinions? 
Third, do you guys think they will be able to tap into the makerworld or thingaverse to download and print models or will they always have to design their own? 
US law does not allow NASA to cooperate with CNSA and other laws provide some limit on foreign made parts in their space craft (I have not checked if the have a foreign parts quota but if they do not I will very very surprised; the part about not being able to coperate with Chinese space agency is 100% correct and verified). It will very likely be a US made printer, of a very simple but robust design for which they have the full plans and circuit diagrams. Even if they could bring a chinese machiine they would not use a bambu because of this.
4 Likes
I’ve been flying products my company makes on the ISS for a few years now, and we’ll be going to the moon on a rover sometime in the not too distant future (forget when).
I doubt they will take a consumer grade 3D printer with them. My products didn’t need any changes, they’re basically a sub-component of a larger system. But there was a detailed certification process none the less.
I suspect the types of components you’d find in a consumer grade 3D printer would make them very nervous. A UL/CSA certification number isn’t going to be enough. Unsurprisingly, they tend to worry a lot about things that can get hot and catch fire. 
Air quality is also something they pay a lot of attention to. “Outgassing” (the phenomenon that gives things their “new” smell - cars, electronics, carpet, etc.) is a no-no. VoCs tend to accumulate. Their printer would need a much better enclosure than our BBL printers come with.
On a positive note, my products aren’t built for use in Space and in spite of that, they’re performing great, as good as on Earth. Which, TBT, confuses the heck out of me because of something called the “Neutron Flux Density” (radiation). So if any one of you happens to get a chance to go in to Space, odds are if you take it with you, your printer will work fine.
4 Likes
3D printing? Low to no gravity? Bambu?
As I take out my crystal ball and gaze into it​
, I see many blobs in NASAs not-too-distant future… 
2 Likes
I don’t think gravity plays much of a part in FDM printing. The extruder pushes the filament into the small area under the nozzle, where it is pressed into the plate or previous layers. There isn’t much chance for gravity to act on the melted filament. I remember seeing YouTube videos of printers operating successfully while hanging upside down and on their sides.
And you could probably eliminate most supports.
Accidentally letting go of a spool could result in some interesting tangles, and resin printing in space could be a real challenge.
2 Likes
No? Then why do we have supports if gravity doesn’t absolutely suck? 
1 Like
Maybe what I should have said was that gravity is not required for a successful FDM print. Supports are only needed to overcome gravity. No gravity, no supports needed.
2 Likes
Purging may be a bit tricky. A bambu printer would in fact create a blob, because no gravity. I imagine it will be a special stratasys. They have 4 printers on the space station. One being a zero G printer.
AI below. Warning for those who dont like it.
“For the upcoming lunar missions, NASA and its partners are developing several different 3D printing technologies. While traditional FDM (Fused Deposition Modeling) printers are already used on the International Space Station for tools, the Moon missions are shifting toward “in-situ resource utilization” (ISRU)—using the Moon’s own soil (regolith) to build structures.
​The primary system currently being developed for this is called the Olympus Construction System.
​1. The Olympus Construction System (ICON)
​NASA has awarded a significant contract to the Texas-based company ICON to develop this large-scale 3D printer. Unlike the desktop printers you might have in your lab, this is a massive robotic system designed to build infrastructure.
​Technology Type: Large-scale robotic additive manufacturing.
​Material: It uses Lunar Regolith (Moon dust/rock) mixed with various bonding agents or melted directly.
​Primary Goals: Building landing pads, roads, and eventually pressurized habitats for astronauts.
​Method: The printer is “material agnostic,” meaning it can be adapted to use the local minerals found at the landing site rather than hauling heavy concrete from Earth.
​2. Laser-Based 3D Printing (Regolith Melting)
​Research from institutions like Ohio State University and various NASA centers is focusing on a process similar to Selective Laser Sintering (SLS) or Directed Energy Deposition (DED).
​How it works: A high-powered laser is used to melt the lunar regolith. As the molten dust cools, it fuses into a hard, ceramic-like solid.
​Benefit: This requires no “glue” or “binder” brought from Earth, making it incredibly efficient for long-term sustainability.
​Durability: The resulting material is excellent for radiation shielding and protection from micrometeorites, which is a major concern for lunar bases.
​3. Redwire Regolith Print (RRP)
​Redwire Space is another key player that has already tested its hardware on the International Space Station.
​The Mission: They successfully demonstrated 3D printing using a lunar regolith simulant in microgravity.
​Hardware: They use custom-designed 3D printing heads compatible with their existing Additive Manufacturing Facility (AMF). This proof-of-concept shows that we can successfully extrude regolith-laden materials in space environments.”
1 Like
What? No more supports, overhangs for everyone!
1 Like
Also no more filament drying.
1 Like
What makes you say that? Space stations aren’t zero humidity
1 Like
They aren’t. But they manage humidity very carefully because a lot of the internal surfaces of the spacecraft are cold and they’ll condense moisture and corrode metal and possibly short circuit electronic stuff.
Usually, the humidity in a house or building is under 50%. The ISS (as an example) is held at 60% humidity.
Nah, given the lackluster shielding of components they probably wouldn’t use them. The 3D printers they will bring will have to be really small to fit several of them on the Artemis rocket, and handle the vibrations and G forces exerted during the launch. Given that NASA has practically unlimited budget they’ll probably bring some metal 3D printers as that is more useful, and use some super exotic, custom-engineered, $10,000 dollar per kilo filament that requires like 800c to print.
1 Like
I think the Ai post about about the moon rock filament is legit, but your probably right about the printers being some $100k new moon ready design.
It’s less than they’re likely to experience shipping from Bambu’s factory to your house. 4 g is about the max for launch (higher on reentry but they won’t be bringing their printers back). Bad shocks in shipping/handling can be on the order of 100s of g. But even normal shipping shocks can be well in excess of 4 g.
Manned rocket launches are fairly benign. Acceleration builds relatively slowly when the engines start up (or they’d rip the rocket apart), and the mass of the rocket dampens out any really sharp impulses. At liftoff, they’re only feeling a little bit more than 1 g. Peak acceleration is reached just a little before the main engine’s fuel is used up, when the rocket is getting a lot lighter and the thrust produces higher acceleration.
Like I said, I’m flying my products on the ISS and they had to ride a rocket to get there and we didn’t have to use any special packaging, basically just had to fit in a specifically sized box but using our normal packaging materials.
1 Like
“Houston we have a problem. We can’t communicate with Bambu Cloud from up here. Should we use Orcaslicer instead? Over”
2 Likes
