Slashdot Mirror

The beautiful thing about this is that while such certification and testing may be required of manufacturers and distributors of such products, there is nothing that can be done to stop you from building one yourself or with a few friends.

There are others who have also traveled this path, and a number of open source designs available for anyone to have a go at: Robohand @ Thingiverse, Prosthetics @ Thingiverse

There's currently quite a bit of fun hackery going on with TPlink WR703n routers. See these: OpenWRT, LibraryBox, expansion hub, 3D printable case, external antenna md (PDF) or pre-modded for extra ram+flash. I'm currently trying to get HSMM-MESH going on one.

Yeah, they had one before. I got it for my Nexus 4 six months ago. But there's a reason it got 1-2 stars: it's angled and doesn't hold the phone:

http://www.amazon.com/Google-Nexus-Wireless-Charger/dp/B00BGSPIP2

I almost threw it out but then discovered this 3D printed adapter that actually fixed all of its flaws. It now works great, and it charges the phone fast when plugged into the wall! But since most people don't have a 3D printer, it makes sense they'd want to sweep the memory of that one under the carpet.

I could see cake decorations being printed on-demand in your local supermarket. Dad likes Game of Thrones? Print him a cyvasse set and put it on his birthday cake.

3d printing with sugar is well on its way to becoming a mature technology already, so yeah, a few years and I wouldn't be surprised to see it at the bakery.

There've been open source spectrometers for smartphones and webcams on Thingiverse and PublicLab.org for a few years: http://thingiverse.com/thing:49934, http://thingiverse.com/thing:125428

http://publiclab.org/wiki/spectrometer

And a papercraft spectrometer for $10: http://publiclab.org/wiki/foldable-spec

The new project looks great -- I just hope the new project intends compatibility with the growing open/crowdsourced spectral library at http://spectralworkbench.org/ -- because the more data in there, the easier matching becomes.

Welcome to the open spectrometry movement!

There've been open source spectrometers for smartphones and webcams on Thingiverse and PublicLab.org for a few years: http://thingiverse.com/thing:49934, http://thingiverse.com/thing:125428

http://publiclab.org/wiki/spectrometer

And a papercraft spectrometer for $10: http://publiclab.org/wiki/foldable-spec

The new project looks great -- I just hope the new project intends compatibility with the growing open/crowdsourced spectral library at http://spectralworkbench.org/ -- because the more data in there, the easier matching becomes.

Welcome to the open spectrometry movement!

That doesn't seem to be a problem.

Actually, I think all of those are covers, not cases, but that is also what TFS mentioned.

That doesn't seem to be a problem.

Actually, I think all of those are covers, not cases, but that is also what TFS mentioned.

That doesn't seem to be a problem.

Actually, I think all of those are covers, not cases, but that is also what TFS mentioned.

I've been looking for a 3D printable model of Stallman's dick. Where can I find one?

--
BMO

here you go http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:41779

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:52538

Good for them. I want a unicorn, and I'm not going to get that either.

You could make one with a 3D printer.

Eeyup, 3D printers just got 20% cooler.

Good for them. I want a unicorn, and I'm not going to get that either.

You could make one with a 3D printer.

Eeyup, 3D printers just got 20% cooler.

This link proves you wrong!

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:25897

Sounds like you need to use a bit of hairspray on your hotplate, you had lifting.

I saw some things here:
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/5-year-old-gets-3-d-printed-robohand-internet-collaborators-1B8242915

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:44150

I'm not sure if it would work for an artist, but it is supposed to be low-cost.

of course it would be a proprietary cartridge based piece of shit.

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:76083 looks like you dont need to go buy their cartridges ;)

Get your wallet out:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1216

What's holding back 3-D printing is that it's only good for making plastic crap.

Doing something useful, like replicating a new carburetor for my 30-year-old roto-tiller, is more difficult and more expensive.

It'll take a bit more work then just pressing print and walking a way. But it can be done: Lost PLA Casting [Another Source]

What's really holding back 3D-Printing is people assuming something is holding back 3D-Printing.

You mean like this: http://thingiverse.com/ ?

Yes, i know it's not exhaustive. Contribute.

Lyman Filament Extruder II:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34653

http://techland.time.com/2013/03/04/how-an-83-year-old-inventor-beat-the-high-cost-of-3d-printing/

Where do you get the plans for those miniatures? I was thinking about doing the same thing.

Not easy to find miniatures that print nice on current printers, that is, miniatures with no difficult overhang or holes. Pocket-dungeon on thingiverse is good though, and made for printers: http://www.thingiverse.com/dutchmogul/designs They overcome overhang problem by using heavily robes around the legs little facial detail (nose and such), and cutting of the designs requiring glueing them. I print ABS and want to try vapour acetone treatment on prints next.

I tried Wings3d first, and it's easy to get into and make some compositions of cubes and spheres and whatnot. There's a good starting tutorial here where you make a simple table.

However, as a programmer, I find it much faster and more intuitive to use OpenSCAD. Instead of clicking on things and moving them around on the screen, you edit code that generates the objects. There are thousands of examples to get you started at thingiverse. Here's one of mine.

At the other extreme, Google Sketchup is excellent for the "click and drag objects around" approach. Its UI is way more powerful than Wings3D, and it may even be an easier starting point for non-programmers.

I tried Wings3d first, and it's easy to get into and make some compositions of cubes and spheres and whatnot. There's a good starting tutorial here where you make a simple table.

However, as a programmer, I find it much faster and more intuitive to use OpenSCAD. Instead of clicking on things and moving them around on the screen, you edit code that generates the objects. There are thousands of examples to get you started at thingiverse. Here's one of mine.

At the other extreme, Google Sketchup is excellent for the "click and drag objects around" approach. Its UI is way more powerful than Wings3D, and it may even be an easier starting point for non-programmers.

Yep.

You sound like an engineer. :-)

TFA itself contains many useful links, including a link to Thingverse, which in turn has a link to the BOM and everything else needed in the way of documentation.

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34653

credit? like

last year
http://makibox.com/blogpost/items/makibox_smooth_print_public_demo_and_scribble

3 years ago
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4156

but hey, 3doodler is patent pending!

More that the quality (which is most assuredly is an issue) the material is a more important factor. Know any good ways to print copper plates, or cryostat vessels etc.

You can print casts in wax, and make lost wax casts. I don't know if you can casts bopper in them, wikipedia only mentions gold, silver, bronze and brass. However, unless you need very intricate geometries, I think traditional metalworking is better.

those that are plastic usually need to be very transparent and I don't imagine 3D printing will achieve anything like the clarity we need.

A single layer can be somewhat transparent (I printed this in clear blue PLA, and the wings are kind of transparent), but multiple layers are, at best, translucent. That might just be my expertise, of course, and I would imagine stereolithography being better at optics than extrusion, as the detail level is much better.

However, if anyone has a 3D printer and the time we do have detailed 3D models of the detector geometry that we use for simulations. There has already been a Lego model of ATLAS developed so, if you are up for a challenge, how about a 3D printed model of ATLAS? It would be great to have for outreach talks at high schools!

Do you have an 3D file of the ATLAS detector (preferably .stl)? I would love to try it, though I will probably botch it.

The greatest moment is when Rich and I were working together with Liam in South Africa. The moment Liam realized that his wrist motion powered the device, he exclaimed "It copies me!!". -Ivan Owen & Richard Van As

source here

Sorry to say, your part of the less than 1% of people that care about this. Nokia doesn't want 1%, they want a viable share of the world market. Making phones unlockable is not their priority and having it on Linux doesn't sell more phones than it being MS or Black Berry OS.

I love the fact that they released blue prints for 3d printers. This is without a doubt a marketing move but I have yet to see Apple do the same thing.

Though I'm not a fan of "the use it the way we intended, or die a death of 1,000 cuts through our inflexible configuration" mentality of Apple, they do make some awesome decisions when it comes to marketing. For quite some time they have been providing specs on their devices for case designers. I suspect this is to help encourage the whole Apple ecosystem. You can find all the specs over at the Apple Developers Page

A quick search over at The Thingiverse yields many printable cases based on these specs.

I wish other manufactuers such as Samsung, HTC and LG would release their designs specs. Instead I'm left here with my vernie calipers and a crapload of guessing.

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34653

A seriously awesome move by Nokia. True innovators of the smartphone industry.

It's actually kind of a cool move for a corporation to actually recognize that some people are into making their own accessories or replacement parts.

Unfortunately for Nokia, the intersection between the kinds of people who do 3D printing of their own phone accessories and the kinds of people who buy Lumia's seems quite small.. well, compare this to this or this. Maybe this announcement will help, but I have my doubts. I could Google doing something similar with their Nexus gear, though.

A seriously awesome move by Nokia. True innovators of the smartphone industry.

It's actually kind of a cool move for a corporation to actually recognize that some people are into making their own accessories or replacement parts.

Unfortunately for Nokia, the intersection between the kinds of people who do 3D printing of their own phone accessories and the kinds of people who buy Lumia's seems quite small.. well, compare this to this or this. Maybe this announcement will help, but I have my doubts. I could Google doing something similar with their Nexus gear, though.

A seriously awesome move by Nokia. True innovators of the smartphone industry.

It's actually kind of a cool move for a corporation to actually recognize that some people are into making their own accessories or replacement parts.

Unfortunately for Nokia, the intersection between the kinds of people who do 3D printing of their own phone accessories and the kinds of people who buy Lumia's seems quite small.. well, compare this to this or this. Maybe this announcement will help, but I have my doubts. I could Google doing something similar with their Nexus gear, though.

Off-topic. This is a reply to a comment you made ages ago that stuck in my head: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38854

You DO realize that putting designs in thingiverse, that you're giving tools to Skynet to kill all humans, right?

Anyhow, thingiverse is still woefully lacking.

Yeah OK, I'll bite.

A) Skill
Nearly anyone can operate a 3D printer quietly, cleanly, inexpensively and safely. Comparing a lathe or mill to a 3D printer is akin to rubbishing a Ford Focus because it's not an F-15. Someone having read a wiki can download an STL from thingiverse, click print and enjoy the results. Getting good at machining takes years of dedication.

B) Cost
A reprap can be built for under $800 and a little elbow grease. The cheapest vertical mill is about USD$4k, not including shipping, installation, and replacing the shitty bits. Running costs for a reprap are far lower also, both in terms of power consumption, tooling and stock.

C) Part strength
Obviously this is where Fused Deposition Method (FDM) printing can't keep up to a part machined from steel or aluminium, but that's not the point. There are a great many things around the average house or workshop for which a 3D-printed part would be perfectly suitable. Examples:

Buckle clip:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1272
Wifi-driven tank (Disclaimer: mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:13496
Goddamned quadcopter (also mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26041
Angle brackets:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34422
Storage bins:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38194
Tape dispenser:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34816

In summary: Nobody is going to install a mill in their home office. 3D printed parts are suitable for many actually useful applications, not just trivial frippery.

Yeah OK, I'll bite.

A) Skill
Nearly anyone can operate a 3D printer quietly, cleanly, inexpensively and safely. Comparing a lathe or mill to a 3D printer is akin to rubbishing a Ford Focus because it's not an F-15. Someone having read a wiki can download an STL from thingiverse, click print and enjoy the results. Getting good at machining takes years of dedication.

B) Cost
A reprap can be built for under $800 and a little elbow grease. The cheapest vertical mill is about USD$4k, not including shipping, installation, and replacing the shitty bits. Running costs for a reprap are far lower also, both in terms of power consumption, tooling and stock.

C) Part strength
Obviously this is where Fused Deposition Method (FDM) printing can't keep up to a part machined from steel or aluminium, but that's not the point. There are a great many things around the average house or workshop for which a 3D-printed part would be perfectly suitable. Examples:

Buckle clip:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1272
Wifi-driven tank (Disclaimer: mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:13496
Goddamned quadcopter (also mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26041
Angle brackets:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34422
Storage bins:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38194
Tape dispenser:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34816

In summary: Nobody is going to install a mill in their home office. 3D printed parts are suitable for many actually useful applications, not just trivial frippery.

Yeah OK, I'll bite.

A) Skill
Nearly anyone can operate a 3D printer quietly, cleanly, inexpensively and safely. Comparing a lathe or mill to a 3D printer is akin to rubbishing a Ford Focus because it's not an F-15. Someone having read a wiki can download an STL from thingiverse, click print and enjoy the results. Getting good at machining takes years of dedication.

B) Cost
A reprap can be built for under $800 and a little elbow grease. The cheapest vertical mill is about USD$4k, not including shipping, installation, and replacing the shitty bits. Running costs for a reprap are far lower also, both in terms of power consumption, tooling and stock.

C) Part strength
Obviously this is where Fused Deposition Method (FDM) printing can't keep up to a part machined from steel or aluminium, but that's not the point. There are a great many things around the average house or workshop for which a 3D-printed part would be perfectly suitable. Examples:

Buckle clip:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1272
Wifi-driven tank (Disclaimer: mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:13496
Goddamned quadcopter (also mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26041
Angle brackets:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34422
Storage bins:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38194
Tape dispenser:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34816

In summary: Nobody is going to install a mill in their home office. 3D printed parts are suitable for many actually useful applications, not just trivial frippery.

Yeah OK, I'll bite.

A) Skill
Nearly anyone can operate a 3D printer quietly, cleanly, inexpensively and safely. Comparing a lathe or mill to a 3D printer is akin to rubbishing a Ford Focus because it's not an F-15. Someone having read a wiki can download an STL from thingiverse, click print and enjoy the results. Getting good at machining takes years of dedication.

B) Cost
A reprap can be built for under $800 and a little elbow grease. The cheapest vertical mill is about USD$4k, not including shipping, installation, and replacing the shitty bits. Running costs for a reprap are far lower also, both in terms of power consumption, tooling and stock.

C) Part strength
Obviously this is where Fused Deposition Method (FDM) printing can't keep up to a part machined from steel or aluminium, but that's not the point. There are a great many things around the average house or workshop for which a 3D-printed part would be perfectly suitable. Examples:

Buckle clip:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1272
Wifi-driven tank (Disclaimer: mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:13496
Goddamned quadcopter (also mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26041
Angle brackets:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34422
Storage bins:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38194
Tape dispenser:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34816

In summary: Nobody is going to install a mill in their home office. 3D printed parts are suitable for many actually useful applications, not just trivial frippery.

Yeah OK, I'll bite.

A) Skill
Nearly anyone can operate a 3D printer quietly, cleanly, inexpensively and safely. Comparing a lathe or mill to a 3D printer is akin to rubbishing a Ford Focus because it's not an F-15. Someone having read a wiki can download an STL from thingiverse, click print and enjoy the results. Getting good at machining takes years of dedication.

B) Cost
A reprap can be built for under $800 and a little elbow grease. The cheapest vertical mill is about USD$4k, not including shipping, installation, and replacing the shitty bits. Running costs for a reprap are far lower also, both in terms of power consumption, tooling and stock.

C) Part strength
Obviously this is where Fused Deposition Method (FDM) printing can't keep up to a part machined from steel or aluminium, but that's not the point. There are a great many things around the average house or workshop for which a 3D-printed part would be perfectly suitable. Examples:

Buckle clip:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1272
Wifi-driven tank (Disclaimer: mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:13496
Goddamned quadcopter (also mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26041
Angle brackets:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34422
Storage bins:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38194
Tape dispenser:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34816

In summary: Nobody is going to install a mill in their home office. 3D printed parts are suitable for many actually useful applications, not just trivial frippery.

Yeah OK, I'll bite.

A) Skill
Nearly anyone can operate a 3D printer quietly, cleanly, inexpensively and safely. Comparing a lathe or mill to a 3D printer is akin to rubbishing a Ford Focus because it's not an F-15. Someone having read a wiki can download an STL from thingiverse, click print and enjoy the results. Getting good at machining takes years of dedication.

B) Cost
A reprap can be built for under $800 and a little elbow grease. The cheapest vertical mill is about USD$4k, not including shipping, installation, and replacing the shitty bits. Running costs for a reprap are far lower also, both in terms of power consumption, tooling and stock.

C) Part strength
Obviously this is where Fused Deposition Method (FDM) printing can't keep up to a part machined from steel or aluminium, but that's not the point. There are a great many things around the average house or workshop for which a 3D-printed part would be perfectly suitable. Examples:

Buckle clip:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1272
Wifi-driven tank (Disclaimer: mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:13496
Goddamned quadcopter (also mine):
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:26041
Angle brackets:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34422
Storage bins:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:38194
Tape dispenser:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:34816

In summary: Nobody is going to install a mill in their home office. 3D printed parts are suitable for many actually useful applications, not just trivial frippery.

This! You wouldn't believe how much trouble it's been to build a laser-cut TechZone Remix Mendel. None of the electronics will mount properly, some pieces don't fit, and I had to find a sealant that'd work at 500F and not screw up the thrermocouple by shorting it out. Permatex may be the winner - I'll find out when it's finished.

My printer did not have instructions sent with it. Consider yourself lucky. I've had to follow half a dozen websites to figure out how it goes together and how other people have screwed up. The first guy I followed nearly set his extruder on fire, so assembly went on a 10-month hiatus.

What I wouldn't give for a single-board implementation like this one for the electronics. Instead, I get this cluster and have to get someone to grind a piece of wood into shape. That mounting board design plus zip ties were a godsend.

I would have paid $500 extra if it came pre-assembled, not just in kit form. I don't even know if mine will work yet.

The main point of casting from a 3D print is to change the material from being "3D printed plastic" to being any other flowable thing: metal, urethane, transparent resin epoxy, silicone, plaster of paris, etc. What your 3D printer is bringing to the table is the shape. So the key feature you're looking for, if you want to do molding and casting, is getting the right shape out. Material strength is relatively unimportant.

ABS has an impressive material strength, but if you're planning on casting, you should look into PLA printing instead. PLA's material strength sucks compared to ABS, but man is it easier to make good prints with it! You can get better resolution on it -- PLA at 0.1mm vs ABS at 0.2mm -- and the warping and curling issues are greatly reduced. It's a lot more reliable to work with.

The other big reason to use PLA is that it dissolves away in boiling water. Stick your PLA mold and whatever you casted into it into a crock pot for a day, and the PLA's gone.

Any 3D printer that can print ABS can also print PLA. Check out the MakerGear M2: Metal frame, way cheaper than a Makerbot, and it beat the Makerbot and several other contenders in Make Magazine's 3D printer roundup recently. Good accuracy, speed, and print quality. Good business ethics too (Makerbot's not so popular around here these days since they suddenly changed to closed source.)

As a note, if you're truly obsessed with getting the right shape, you should be looking at milling machines, not 3D printers. Milling machines go down to more like 0.001mm resolution. The process is detailed here.

Last, this is an awesome set of pictures showing lost PLA casting (plaster of paris -> metal)

Check out this guys information on Lost ABS casting. Very interesting!

One day, apparently soon, we'll be able to hook up Things to The Internet.

Hi. I use the Makerbot Replicator professionally to make equipment for my lab. I'm also a member of the Makerbot Google Group, who largely share my views:

(1) Good on them for going closed source. The Makerbot people have done a lot of work advancing the state of the art in consumer-level 3D printing technology. And they're being copied all over the place: there are kickstarters for near-identical models with shittier manufacturing that undercut their business. This is exactly what patents are made for, to protect innovation! And Makerbot Industries held off going closed source until they were forced to. Ultimately, I want Makerbot Industries to stay alive and keep being able to sell stuff so they can keep their R&D going. Also, they're great advertisers for 3D printing technology, and they're helping it gain mass appeal. More power to them.

Closed source or not, 3D printing puts a ton of power in the hands of ordinary people. Who cares if the printer is patented?

(2) People are feeling betrayed and that is really, really sad. See Occupy Thingiverse for details. I really hope this doesn't end Thingiverse. But it is creating awareness of the Thingiverse license agreement, which I suppose is a good thing.

(3) GOD DAMN THAT THING LOOKS AWESOME. I can't help but want the Replicator 2, it's gorgeous. It looks like the design idea here is "it does less stuff but does it better" - there's no ability to print ABS and no dual extrusion, but if it works as advertised, getting good prints out of it will be much easier.

(4) It's almost annoying how fast they iterate. The original Replicator came out in January, and this thing's already out? WTF? I've barely had time to play with the previous one, and now the support community will be split between the two models. So it'll be harder to find info on the Replicator and not on the Replicator 2.

(5) I don't know if I'll continue to support Makerbot Industries so much. Truth be, before this annoucement I was already considering a cheaper non-Makerbot 3D printer (e.g. the truly open-source RepRap). If Makerbot is going closed source all the way, that may be enough of a push to get me to buy something else. I'd be willing to pay more to support the open-source ideal.

In short, if they're going pure capitalist, then I'm going to do the same to them.

There is nothing wrong with toys. But once they get cheap enough (and the raw materials for the printing do too) there are many people who could get good use out of one. Once they get cheap enough (maybe in a year or two at this rate) I'll have one, though I must admit that for me it will be a toy for the most part. I would use it for making customised gifts (for instance customised versions of http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:30487 and http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:22125 for my sister in law who is nuts on ducks and bats) and so forth as well as just "playing". If you consider what I've spent on computer equipment over the years when I don't need a fraction of that power, these things really aren't going to be that extravagant soon.

For more practical uses: Anyone who does art such as model-making and other crafting could make the device pay for itself easily for prototyping (you'd still need to get thing professionally made if you want the final version in bulk, of course). I have friends who pay far too much for figures for their wargames: if the output is high enough resolution to get reasonable detail and it doesn't need too much smoothing/sanding to get a good look then they could save a packet and get customised models as a free extra nice-to-have. Parents could no doubt find many things to do with one, for or with the kids, assuming the materials used are non-toxic enough. Most people don't need their own ink-on-paper printer, but most homes with a computer have one and make use of it - 3D printers may be in the same position in a few years time.

There is nothing wrong with toys. But once they get cheap enough (and the raw materials for the printing do too) there are many people who could get good use out of one. Once they get cheap enough (maybe in a year or two at this rate) I'll have one, though I must admit that for me it will be a toy for the most part. I would use it for making customised gifts (for instance customised versions of http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:30487 and http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:22125 for my sister in law who is nuts on ducks and bats) and so forth as well as just "playing". If you consider what I've spent on computer equipment over the years when I don't need a fraction of that power, these things really aren't going to be that extravagant soon.

For more practical uses: Anyone who does art such as model-making and other crafting could make the device pay for itself easily for prototyping (you'd still need to get thing professionally made if you want the final version in bulk, of course). I have friends who pay far too much for figures for their wargames: if the output is high enough resolution to get reasonable detail and it doesn't need too much smoothing/sanding to get a good look then they could save a packet and get customised models as a free extra nice-to-have. Parents could no doubt find many things to do with one, for or with the kids, assuming the materials used are non-toxic enough. Most people don't need their own ink-on-paper printer, but most homes with a computer have one and make use of it - 3D printers may be in the same position in a few years time.

Not at all. You can put this inside your house: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:21359

In fact, it is in my bathroom for half a year now, and I never had any problems. Off course, you have to empty it onto the external compost heap once in a while.