Slashdot Mirror
First Factory Use Of 'Replicator' For Spare Parts
maddogsparky writes: "Over at Spacedaily, there is an article about how a 3D printer was used to fabricate a replacement part in a production environment--the first known case. They've also done some tests in NASA's vomit comet and are planning on a shuttle test for applications on the ISS or Mars trip."
Where can I get one?
...but until it can "replicate" a pint of Guinness I'm afraid I have no use for it.
Heh, cool you can now replace those *missing* lego pieces! =) (or create new ones??)
I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!
Next step is to get the replacement time down from 4 or 5 hours to "push a button, shimmering light beam, replacement part appears". Sounds interesting, one of those machines could cut down on the amount of "extra" items that need to be shipped to the ISS (why take an extra wrench when we can make one when we get there?)... meaning more space on shuttle launches for other stuff.
See, a 3d printer is exactly what I've been needing all these years!
A personal transporter is next on my list...
Whats incredible is that this stuff (well the 'replicator' anyway) is actually starting to happen.
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
First of all, all things aside, this is just plain cool. It shows a potentially helpful technology doing its job under real-life conditions. This looks like a solid demonstration of the practicality of the technology. I expect this example will be used again and again to show why the fabrication technology is a good idea.
Now, unfortunately, come the repercussions in our copyright/patent/IP-obsessed age. Now that someone can whip up things easily, we're going to see a repeat of the fears that led us to the DMCA, et al. These machines could concievably duplicate something you don't have the right to - time for massive government controls!
Let's hope we're all well-armed mentally for the next conflict.
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
The article mentions that the failed part was made of aluminium, but that the rapid prototyper can only make parts out of polycarbonate, wax, etc. I'm guessing that the part they "printed out" was only being used as a temporary replacement until the actual aluminium pulley could be shipped to them. Still, we're on the way!
Anyone know if there's work being done on stereolithography using a wider variety of materials? It seems to me that that's the biggest obstacle before we have bonafide "replicators."
Causation can cause correlation
I want some Snapple Lemon Iced Tea, Cold.
Can it do that? There is never one around when I need it.
Time is only wasted when.... umm I forgot...
Maybe it automatically "replicates" a Unix version whenever Windows crashes. :p
Do you like German cars?
These 3D printers have been around for at least 10 years. It's amazing that it took this long to finally implement one in a production enviroment... Good to see progress though...
Let me know when they have one that can produce a ham sandwitch (made of han and chease and bread rather than polymer resin).
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
I had a friend who worked at Stratasys for a while.
It was a pretty cool place, their engineers were constantly making things out of plastics w/ their "3D Printer". Somewhere around here I have a small 4" high godzilla that was printed out.
If you ever get a chance to see one of these machines in person printing out "something" it is fascinating.
Someone tries to get it to replicate Pamela Anderson. She's mostly silicone anyway, right?
I don't understand why this is news. At Siggraph they have had the 3D printers for years. You can get 3D printers that plug into networks via regular Ethernet and you can feed it CAD files. They have shown full working models of things like engines. Check out Z Corp and a whole list of resources here.
This is far from a "replicator." The items take quite a bit of time to built up. Even small items take over a day. Not an instant solution by far...
"Yes.. no matter what the culture, folk dancing is stupid." -MST3K
maybe they can use it to build cheaper processors.
Does anyone know what the minimum scale that this gizmo can produce is? They've got some pictures of a fully-functional wrench (WOW!) on the Stratasys web site, which would imply that there's some fairly fine control (for the spinny groove things). I just ask since one of the coolest things I can imaging is a box like this spitting out a fully-functional (mechanical) watch. And of course, taking that to the most ridiculous extreme, having a box that could spit out a computer - in the form of Babbage's Difference Engine. ;-)
AHHHHHHH! I'm burning with goodness again!
- Reakk, Sluggy Freelance
"While a humble pulley helps usher in an era of rapid manufacturing on earth.."
What a novel idea for the first invention... the wheel
Is this what you call re-inventing the wheel?
While the technology itself seems absolutely fantastic, it's current state leaves me with some questions...
How much does one of the fabricators cost? How long do the polycarbonate material parts hold up? Does it cost less to create X number of polycarbonate material replacement parts over a year than it does Y number of aluminum (or whatever material is traditionally used) parts over the same year?
I remember the first time I saw rapid 3d prototyping devices like this: a television show (probably on The Discovery Channel) a few years back that showed a tour of a Tupperware facility. Tupperware was using a CAD tool in cooperation with a special plastic molding device to make prototypes for new containers. My immediate reaction was that someone would eventually use tools like this for quickly creating temporary replacement parts. Glad to see I was right about something for once. *laugh*
My sigs always suck.
Will Linux support these 3D printers, or will the inability of Linux programmers to comply with the upcoming SSSCA make them Windows- and Mac-only, possibly with some proprietary-Unix support?
Looks like Linux is falling behind again, simply because the "community" can't deal with the reality that some things cost money, and are worth purchasing, even rights to use someone else's intellectual property.
Is that lithography can be used to "machine" parts to greater tolerances than conventional processes. This means that bearings and joints can be more reliable and require less lubrication.
I'm sure you all realize what this could be used for...
Best Real Doll ever!
--Shoeboy
It seems to me that 4 hours included the time to make a CAD model for the broken pulley. On another note, I wonder how much torque that crescent wrench could take before deforming?
science is a religion
This may be a great thing for manned space flight and work in treacherous conditions. Imagine if the supply vehicles sent up to the ISS were unloaded of contents and then disassembled to provide raw material for use in case a part failed. They would have a 3-d fabricator on the station that they could use to manufacture many simple parts like rods, sheets, bolts, etc... It could make sending up supply ships much more efficient. Then after something breaks, you break it down to raw material for re-fabrication or for other tools.
NASA could keep breaking down the station and rebuilding it with its own raw material. Oooh borg-like. This could also be useful for some underwater stations/vessels and arctic or oil drilling where it is hard to get stuff shipped to people.
Then if they could just get replicators to replicate themselves...
It seems that parts have been produced using stereolithographic techniques for years... While using a fused resin part for investment casting is not direct fabrication, that seems close enough to me.
There is a lot cooler stuff than this going on right now.. Take a look at
this for some other cool 3-D rapid prototyping systems that are in development. The LENS system (about halfway down) is especially cool since they can form parts directly using materials that are difficult to form otherwise (strange Ti alloys), and change the composition and cooling rates along the length of the part...
Oh, and where the hell was this guy's boss when he used the quarter million dollar rapid prototyper to make a two dollar aluminum pulley for a sander... Don't even tell me that polycarbonate will be a good substitute for a pulley in a sander which was originally made from aluminum.
This does have very cool applications in fabrication of replica parts for antique cars and the like... It would be cool to go down to NAPA in 10 years and have them print out brake pad rubber for my subaru...
+++ ATH0 +++
my morning space news, you bastards had to link to spacedaily.com and put the slashdot effect on it. dammit. you hosed my favorite space news site.
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
"Although we have many sanders throughout the shop, most of them are continuously used. I didn't have to make the decision to pull a sander away from a less-critical production line. I was able to keep right on going. If we would have had to wait for a new part, that production line would have been down for a few days. It's been a month now, and the belt sander is still going strong.
"Now if anyone asks me about the durability of the rapid prototype parts that come off the Titan, I take them over to the sanding station and tell them the story. You can see the sparks flying off the sander and hear it grinding away - it really opens some eyes. I have an aluminum replacement pulley now, but I'm in no hurry to install it. With the way this one has performed, I want to see how long it lasts!"
This is a bit of a hype situation for several reasons.
First of all, a production situation is rife with bureacracy and regulation. A polycarbonate part cannot always replace a metal or ceramic part, and to alter the machines in a way that would impart agility and flexibility -- the very purpose of the "3-d printer" - would take a mountain of paperwork.
This leads into a second critique. Globalization confers both interdependence and indepdendence.
Right now, production facilities are dependent on parts from distant places.
If facilities can design and fabricate new parts, and put them into use, at various backwaters all over the place, this will place many office workers -- and, perhaps, the entire concept of a centralized "headquarters" -- into obsolescence.
Goat sex free since 2001
(come one, somebody else has to have seen Jurassic Park 3...)
I see a huge benefit here. Send a 3D printer and a bucket of resuable plastic to a remote location (South Pole, remote desert, under water research, even space). Metal tools are expensive, heavy and take up a lot of room to have every wrench size required. If the machine could make a spanner that had enough strenght to fix one or two things, then broke - who cares. Just reuse the plastic. Need a different tool? Just reuse the plastic.
Obviously, critical tools should always be on hand and made from appropriate material.
Also, equally obvious (or should be), standardizing on style of screw heads, socket sizes, etc. should make parts more interchangeable and keep the number of tools required to a minimum.
I'm in my right mind and I have the answer to everything!
Well I think replicator is a total misnomer. I am pretty sure that in this case the engineer involved drew up a 3D rendering of the part he wanted including any microstructure (he could have made it hollow if he wanted).
I mean it's not like this thing scanned in the broken pulley and made a replica based on the scan.
Now I know they can do this (someone mentioned a Godzirra) and I saw on Beyond 2000 (10 years ago) how this thing was used in surgery. A guy had his skull smashed to bits in an accident. They did an MRI and built a model of his skull including the broken bits. This enabled the surgeons to examine the fragments and figure the best way to put them back together (of course this was before they operated).
I thought that was a way cooler implementation and closer to a true replicator.
How perfectly goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure. - Charles Crumb
This would be great for mankind, as the cost of production would be driven down dramatically, and you could literally have whatever you wanted for the cost of the raw materials to build it. I think in a world with laws as ours were even twenty years ago, this might be possible. A molecular Xerox machine certainly, a printer with downloadable "templates" might require a small fee for the templates for a limited time.
But, in our copyright driven world today, I see a future will these machines will not be allowed to exist at all -- or if they are, they will be tightly regulated and locked down. They will only be usable in production plants, by licensed professionals, and only for reproduction of the respective company's own products. Using GE's replicator to build a 1960's Ferrari GTO, though possible, will be quite illegal.
I'm afraid that we are seriously heading down this path, and rather than helping everyone, we'll be keeping prices artifically high and helping a few select companies who happen have more money than everyone else to begin with.
-------------------------------------------------
Which leads to something like Fabster...
The example given of the replacement pully, while very cool, is not as exciting as it seems. As they had that 3-d printing CAD-CAM equipment, of course that is what they used.
For other, less technically inclined companies, a production manager would have a replacement pully fabricated by either an onsite maintainance department, or an on-call machinist. Critical production lines can't wait for the FedEx truck to show up.
It's really cool that this type of technology is implemented, but downtime on the line would be minimized regardless of technologies available.
HA!
Bush sez: You'll get gatse.ms and like it!
The giver was quoted as saying "This just goes to show that the system works -- for those that have millions of dollars to throw at lawyers, lobbiests and campaign sludge funds -- GOD BLESS AMERICA!"
That'd bring a whole new meaning to the words 'free beer', indeed. :)
Still, that's *not* going to happen. Too much of our economy relies on scarcity of products (to the point that corps try to artificially reproduce a scarcity-based model in the digital world, as everybody here will already have noticed). The implications of a replicator that could duplicate anything, independantly of the material, are mind-boggling (richness for everybody and complete economy crash at the same time!). Material for a great sci-fi novel at any rate...
-- B.
This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
Where can I get one?
Build one! The worst part is three stepper motors driving an XYZ table under computer control.
I like EDM myself. Here's a little on EDM, including a link on how to build a very simple one.
While I take no responsibility for anyone getting killed by following my suggestion, I've built my own EDM system for taking broken iron bolts out of aluminum automotive castings. It uses a microwave oven transformer and a bank of oil-filled capacitors. It's a profoundly dangerous machine if you build it wrong. But I've also blown 1/2" Grade-8 bolts out of aluminum castings in a matter of hours.
Wanna hire a computer geek who also knows how to do stuff like this? Great for integrating computers into robotic, industrial and automotive manufacturing processes.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
"Tea, earl grey, hot"
There could be a lucritive bussiness opertunity here.
I would love to see 3D printers begin to show up in places like Kinkos. These things would be a modellers dream! Imagine being able to fabricate your own model parts! If you can model it in virtual space, getting a real space equivalent is a matter of hitting print!
Does anyone know of someplace which is offering access to these printers to paying customers? I would be perfectly happy to email CAD plans to a fabricator if I could get a quick, cheap kit of parts back in the mail.
is a damn black cherry new york seltzer, let old unprofitable sodas live on in replication. give your kids a chance to taste crystal pepsi.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cixel
Umm, I've had a plastic part generated by one of these "santa claus" machines... the 3d printer/fabricator/etc... and the durability of anything that comes out is highly questionable. First the things stink to high heaven from the resins, they are cleaned so they aren't sticky anymore but they are easily broken. I would reccomend putting a module onto the ISS that has a CNC, Lathe, and a milling machine capable of working at least aluminum. That way they can make plastic parts also.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Made to order. Size, texture, and proportion of your choice. Fewer choices of colors.
You think I'm kidding, right? Just wait till the right person reads this....
Interesting. Might we see more factories, one day maybe even homes, with replicators and CAD databases of all the small mechanical objects in them so that, if one breaks, we replicate a replacement and just order more polycarbonate goo from some company the next day? I can see it now: cars, planes, houses, factories, printers... everything coming with a CAD database containing all its mechanical parts.
Umm Linux has been way ahead of the Windoze curve in automation for years now. I can make a complete CNC system based on linux at linuxCNC
hmmm, where's the Windows version available at... Oh yeah... there isn't one.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This is the point where physical items become information, which means we can send them over the internet... good-bye UPS.
Their main use was to "materialize" the designs
of graphic artists. Also they were QC tools of
object-scanning machines.
I used to goto Milwaukee School Of Engineering (MSOE) they have one of the top research labs for rapid prototyping. You can do more than make replacement parts. Molecular models and biological models can also be made. Once they recreated a human jaw bone to help solve a crime.
Here is an overview of how rapid protyping works. here
Yes but every time I try to see it your way, I get a headache.
This headline's use of "production environment" is somewhat misleading. The story refers to this technology being used to fabricate a single replacement part for a machine used on a production line. Out of a non-standard but acceptable substitute material.
To me, "production environment" would be using the machine, full-time, producing parts that end up in customer's hands. That may be happening, for some parts, somewhere, but it isn't what the story is talking about.
And for the rest of you, this isn't Star Trek replicator technology. Get a grip.
Xerox officials held an emergency press conference Wedensday to announce a
total recall of all Reprotron 5000 Three-Dimensional Copy Machines.
Xerox stock has plummeted to a new all-time low since the release of the
innovative device. Xerox hailed the Reprotron 5000 as a "new revolution in
copying" when it introduced the machine just two weeks ago, and market
insiders were certain that the copier would send Xerox stock through the
roof.
At a demonstration of the Reprotron in August, Xerox staffers made full
three-dimensional copies of an Oriental vase, a bowl of fruit, and a perfect
red rose. Reporters were invited to sample apples and oranges copied from
the original fruit, though Xerox technicians did warn that the copied fruit
might taste slightly of toner. John Thompson (inventor of the Reprotron)
stepped forward to make a copy of a Manhattan phone book, but accidentally
copied his hand and forearm. He quickly disposed of the highly detailed,
frantically wiggling half-limb as it slid out of the copier's delivery slot.
But Xerox wasn't ready for what happened next. "We assumed that people would
behave as responsible, thinking human beings with this copier, and obviously
we were wrong," Thompson states. From all across the USA, reports have been
filing in of the copier being used in what Thompson calls "sick, greedy
ways."
At a Copy Center in Austin, Texas, a couple was arrested for making 15
copies of their three-year-old son, Jeremy, and then refusing to pay for the
copies, claiming that some of the new children were "smudged." Local
authorities were uncertain as to which charges should be pressed.
In Union City, Arizona, Treasury Department officials are investigating
reports of a secretary who allegedly copied a single bar of gold bullion 150
times. A task force investigator stated, "Granted, it takes money to make
money, but we're almost certain that this action is in violation of some
laws."
Xerox officials are also under fire from consumers, due to rumors that the
three-dimensional copying technology is imperfect. Harold Butz of Peoria,
Pennsylvania, made a copy of a common cement brick spray-painted gold. Butz
claims he was "shocked and dismayed" when he discovered that the
machine-made copy was 22-karat solid gold. "All I wanted was a really good
copy of a cement brick spray-painted gold'" Butz stated. "What the hell am I
going to do with this thing?"
Xerox plans to scrap all the machines they are able to recall, but Thompson
expressed concern over the so-called "black market Reprotrons."
"Apparently some sick and greedy people discovered that if they had two
machines, they could use one to make a working copy of the other," Thompson
revealed. "To tell the truth, we only sold two machines in all - to the
Cappelli family, a New Jersey based Meat packing firm. These copy pirates
should be aware that as with anything that is copied from a copy and so on,
there are bound to be defects in the copies produced. We have no idea what
kind of stuff will pop out of the slot when a person copies something on a
fourth- or fifth-generation machine." Thompson declined to comment on
reports that hundreds of the pirated machines have a human thumb attached to
the coin slot which constantly wiggles - the result of a person's thumb
getting in the way during one of the original copier-to-copier copies.
"Ultimately, we're not too worried," Thompson stated. "People owning the
copiers will eventually run out of the fluid that make the machine work, and
we've taken all the fluid off the market. A machine can only last two weeks
or so without a fluid refill, and there won't be any fluid refills." When
asked why people with copiers couldn't simply make copies of the fluid
cannisters they already have, Xerox officials hastily ended the press
conference, stating that they "need to reconsider a few things."
Krispy Cream is people
I worked at http://www.3dsystems.com for several years. The SLA machines produce parts from photosensitive resin that have very good material properties and several companies used these parts directly in machines with good results. In fact, one company found that the replacement worked better as a small piece in a vacuum cleaner than the material they were using. They wanted to switch until they found out this stuff cost > $100/litre.
A more interesting useage was the rapid casting technology where they create a hollow inverse of the part, fill it with some kind of metallic powder and then use that directly to manafacture small runs of real parts.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
> I wonder how much torque that crescent wrench could take before deforming?
That depends upon the material they use. For polycarbonate, it'd be fairly close to steel for hand tool purposes (your hand can only apply so much pressure to any tool). The big problem is wear, since (unless you're using poly bolts, which have their own disadvantages) the tool would be softer than the stuff you use it on.
Virg
Magazine had an article on this... it was 2 or 3 months ago.
These machines could concievably duplicate something you don't have the right to - time for massive government controls!
Of course, one day, when we all have 3d printers that can build things out metal, plastic, glass, etc, we'll all be able to build machine guns, tanks, artillery pieces, bombs, ICBMs, invisible psycho-killer robot fish, and what have you.
It's just possible that the odd regulation or two in this area could be beneficial. Just possible.
As far as the IP problem: we'll probably end up with both not-free and free/open-source mechanical designs, just like we have not-free and free/open-source software designs now.
In fact, free/open-source material might meet with a lot more success in the "real world" of physical products than it has in the software realm, because the benefits would be obvious, the drawbacks negligible, and the audience larger. Everyone could see the appeal in free, print-your-own bicycles, wristwatches, tires, vinyl siding, etc. There's a definite limit on the level of excitement a new version of "grep" is going to stir up, though.
Well said. True, some restrictions may be nice - I shouldn't let my cynicism run away with me.
The idea of Open Source hitting the "real world" objects is utterly fascinating. That'd jack up some levels of competition . . .
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
Anyone know if a good replicator could violate any copyright laws in some interesting ways?
Just trying to get the discussion on the proper Slashdot track...
Read the article. A few hours. Not a day
Im sure one of you people out there have a link to some scientific article about the closeness of molecular construction of whatever we want/transporters/etc.... I wonder how close we are to a real replicator.. or, more importantly, a real holodeck. You know everyone would have one, and nobody would leave.
You'd have to spend 8 hours a day though in it running an "Office" program you can't cancel.
but I cream in my pants when new versions of grep come out
Oops....you'll know what I'm talkin about in a bit.
When a belt-sander-pulley failure halted production in the customer's finishing area, the company rapid manufactured a replacement unit from polycarbonate on a Stratasys FDM Titan(TM) prototyping system.
Several hours later, the company was sued by the belt-sander-pulley manufacturer for patent infringement utilizing the Rapid Litigation system.A 3d printer can print out a working 3d printer?
3D printers/Von Neumann machines are cool. You can't argue with exponential growth of production capacity.
Imagine if we could send a 3D machine to the moon and get it to build solar panels and mining equipment, and then another 3D machine... it could send BACK materials and even power to the ISS and earth.
1,2,4,8, who do we appreciate Voooooooon Neuman!!!
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Maybe they could replace the cutting head with a focusable laser to be able to cut aluminium?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
This would be great for mankind, as the cost of production would be driven down dramatically, and you could literally have whatever you wanted for the cost of the raw materials to build it.
You're repeating something that's also been said elsewhere in the thread, as well as being a standard doctrine of nanotechnology, which is that this kind of fabrication would be cheaper than current mass production techniques. What is the basis for that assertion? The equipment itself is currently quite expensive even in the limited forms which are now available, and there is a floor to the cost (unless you know somewhere I can buy a good refrigerator for $10?) Then there is energy, time, and waste, as well as distribution of raw materials and raw materials cost itself.
I haven't seen any basis for the assumption that all of these can be driven to near zero. If they can be driven way down, then so can the costs of mass production, which could be driven down even further due to economies of scale. A machine that only builds one thing is going to produce that one thing faster and cheaper than a machine that can build anything. That's true even of theoretical nanoassembly systems.
Tim
Towards the end of the article the guy is quoted as saying that though a metal replacement was shipped, he wanted to keep the polycarbonate part in place to see how it held up. I trust that if the part fails it is not likely to do so catastrophically and fly across the shop at 50 m/s...
Freedom: "I won't!"
I seem to remember about 10 years ago, when rapid prototyping machines were all in the news, a story in an engineering journal about the use of such a "replicated" part from a rapid prototyper in the field. I believe it was a pedal or some similar part in the cockpit of a B-52 that needed some slight modification. The engineers made a model on a rapid prototyper and took it to the plane to do a test fitting, and the prototype worked so well that they left it in place. Does anyone else know the source of this story?
***Disclosure**** Yes, I do own 1000 shares of this stock. ***Disclosure**** That said, check it out. This company's stock is a great deal.
Seriously though while it's easy to say you mocked up a 3D model of something, that can be quite difficult to do with complex parts, and or parts with complex interior areas. What I'm curious is if there's a complementary capable 3D scanner in which you can drop a metal/plastic part and it'll create a 3D model...but the part might have interior complexity as well (i.e. not just a sphere rectangle or prism, but rather something like a outer planetary gear, etc).
I don't understand how this is news. Wax (manipulating) based Computer Aided Manufacturing machines have been commercially available since the 80s and plastic ones at least sine the early 90s. CAM is not new, so what's the news here, that someone used it??
With tons of nanoassembly plants (we could have them in every community of modest size), we could drastically change manufacture and shipping. And the whole issue of IP is extremely important under these circumstances - since raw materials are relatively cheap, you'd mostly be paying for the license to replication a given widget. This has dramatic patent implications.
Finally, think about the recycling applications. Just as much as you can have nanoconstruction devices which build your devices, you could also have nano-deconstruction units which strip your garbage for raw materials of value. This would allow for you to become much less dependent on stripping the earth of it's resources (just think of the impact on mining!).
This is extremely important technology. It will only get better over time, and as people use it more it will also get cheaper. Exciting times are ahead...
In the spirit of free-as-in-chaos, I have instituted my own private moderation system. Under this system, I hereby give you +1 for Veracity, in partial recompense for the fact that your post was modded down by someone who doesn't share your eye for detail.
-- MarkusQ
The plural of dildo is dildos. Should be the same for lego.
I mean "water pipes" |-) . Have a web site that allows people to choose from a ton of designs or submit your own CAD file. This could be a really cool production tool.
AC
(Don't tell me I'm the only one who thought of this.)
Next on Startrek: "Printer, one hot cup of C8H10N4O2 please, no suggar"
42 + 1 = 42
Build anything you want, just add Soilent Green.
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
From the every-spelling-flame-contains-a-speling-error dept.:
"Aluminum" is correct in the US, but the original spelling of the element is "aluminium." Apparently, the discrepancy occurred from a mistranscribed transatlantic telegram way back when. If you think about it, "aluminium" makes a lot more sense, with the ubiquitious "-ium" element suffix.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= John Reinert Nash -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
i've been working with a company for the last 4 years that's been doing this all along.
check out Solid Concepts.
Liquid Metal Jetting is very cool tech. I took a tour of UT Austin's Automation & Robotics Research Institute and saw them do this in Aluminum and Copper. I know the guy in charge of the project mentioned harder materials, but I can't remember which. Ever wonder how they keep the barrels on tanks from wiggling all over when they move and abruptly stop the turret? That's ARRI too. They do all sorts of cool stuff over there. If you can arrange a tour, I highly recommend it.
/. password.
Geez you take one semester off and ULM disables your accounts. How do they expect me to get my
This project was originally a senior design project in the Rapid Prototyping Center of Milwaukee School of Engineering. Since the graduation of the involved students (two years ago) the project has gone inactive.
Undergraduates interested in summer research in SFF and other rapid prototyping technologies can find more information at www.msoe.edu/reu
General information on the Rapid Prototyping Center is available at www.rpc.msoe.edu
3D printers have been used in fabrication for a while. I just watched a rerun of some show narrated by Joan London, I think, about the FBI using these in their fabrication shops quite a bit.
They like to fabribcate containers to hide electronic observation equipment. They have engineers that worry both about camoflauge and acoustics when designing the pieces.
So I doubt this is the first known case of a non-trivial use of a 3D printer.
Hrmm... now to find some 3D porn.
Here are some cool pictures of what you can do with 3D printers (from another company called Objet). They actually don't have the one I like best (a friend showed me): a human skull with all the trimmings...
Hello shitbag,
It would be "Where are my Lego building blocks?"
You are welcome.
Visit me online.
these services DO exist. They're aimed at commercial users primarily however, and are not cheap. Mostly because the machines are very large professional quality 3d printers and cost thousands and thousands of dollars. And since they specialize in speciality things (like one-time models) and not production runs, its not cheap to use their services.
-
Well, it didn't kill anyone when the original part broke...
Most machines like this also come with covers over as many of the moving parts as possible, to guard against just that.
Nalgene water bottles made of polycarbonate. They can take a lot of abuse and don't deform with time(or leave a funny after-taste).
science is a religion
Consider the IP ramifications of having 2 Trek-style replicators. The replicator company would feel like Sony.
-Dave
But how is that different from when I go into my shed and turn out a gun? The machining isn't particularly hard, and considering that it takes a few hours to turn out a single part it might even be faster for me to do it myself.
The difficulty will still be in the planning. A 3-D printer will not make it any easier to build an "invisible psycho-killer robot fish", since you'd have to design the thing first anyway.
Oh, and unless you get a transporter-style replicator, where's the gunpower/uranium/plutonium gonna come from?
A computer aided machine - which have been around for the last 20+ years.
In fact I can remember designing all kinds of things in the early 90's in some cad application in ms-dos and then manufacturing them on a cam (computer aided machine) just by clicking the mouse. Even things like pullies like the one mentioned in the article.
s/builds/computes and you have the conventional wisdom of the pre-computer age. A machine custom built for computing mortgages would be cheaper than a general-purpose computer, right?
I was reading an interview with a Bell Labs engineer in which the engineer discussed the reluctance to go digital. Bell Labs had perfected the electromechanical switch - with bistable ferreeds they were approaching something like 5 cents per crosspoint. How could digital possibly compete?
I think the answer to all these questions lies in the concentration of engineering effort on one task. If a certain replicator technology becomes viable, companies will keep focusing on making it cheaper and faster. We could get a 'Moore's Law' of fabrication.
'Mentally'? With these replicators you'd be well armed physically.
"What do you need?" ... Lots of guns."
"Guns
Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
imagine the bongs you could make...
...and after using them, then imagine the bongs you could make!
This sig left unintentionally blank.
A machine custom built for computing mortgages would be cheaper than a general-purpose computer, right?
It's an interesting counterargument. The fact is that a special-purpose computer is faster than a general-pupose computer for any real-world algorithm which turns out to be computational expensive. That is one of the main reasons why we have ASICs. However, an ASIC is not necessarily cheaper, since many algorithms run fast enough on the general-purpose processor, and the separate chip would not pay for itself given the lack of demand.
It might be that a general-purpose fabricator would prove to be fast and cheap enough for some common goods, and so undercut the need for mass manufacturing of those goods. However, I think this remains entirely speculative given that we don't have anything like a general-purpose fabricator today, and don't know what its characteristics would be. It probably wouldn't work anyway -- see the current Scientific American, in which the world's only nanotech Nobelist explains why there will never be a nanoassembler
Of course, there is a wide range of possible special-purpose fabrication techniques well short of the dream of general-purpose fabricators, and some of these might be useful for distributed manufacturing. Food and clothing come to mind. Reprogrammable cell cultures together with a robotic chef might be able to make reasonable biological simulacra of most possible foodstuffs, while a robotic loom/sewing machine could produce a great deal of high quality clothing. I submit that in either case, the specialization would allow for faster and cheaper production of the goods than attempting to build them molecule by molecule -- if that were even possible.
Tim
The article gushes on and on about the ability to actually apply this technology, and yet, there's no PICTURE of the pulley actually in use. Hmmmmm....
for anyone with even a wee bit of lathe
experience to crank that part out in Al.
days of downtime my ass.
... TWO replicators, so that you can manufacture spare parts for the one that breaks.
Now I can "download" my purchases thru my broadband connection...
I've personally seen steel parts created directly from CAD drawings years ago. The machine I saw was made by Mitsubishi. It's standard fare in an auto-parts factory.
This has been going on for a lot longer, too. You can see all kinds of articles about the technology at Don Lancaster's site.
There are also some custom auto shops that have deals with factories to get parts made for their customers, at a *very* high cost, of course.
For continued production, this is only cost effective for one-at-a-time parts. It is always significantly cheaper to retool your presses (one produced every few seconds) than to waste time with a 'Santa Claus machine' (one produced every few minutes) when you have to ship 1,000,000 units.
This could be a huge benefit for space missions if the manufacturing speed can be improved. Numbers of spare parts could be reduced. If some new component was needed, it could be designed on earth and the plans could be transmitted to the mission.
JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
Actually I'm waiting for the merging of these printers and nanotech. Imagine the possabilities
This type of technologhy has been around for years, only now does someone realize its actually good for something else then just prototypes.
Yep, it will start with small machine parts but before you know it we'll have Replicants manning the off-world colonies. Where's Deckard when you need him?
First, a little bit of fun, paraphrasing your comments:
Okay okay, I took some liberties, but your comment basically boils down to "it seems counter intuitive, so it can't be true". Nano skeptics are becoming an increasingly endangered species, mainly because the technology looks so promising. And if you think my analogy above is flawed because processing information is qualitively different to processing materials, then I gently suggest you've not thought about nanotech enough. :-)
Your comment:
The equipment itself is currently quite expensive even in the limited forms which are now available (...)
Is like pointing to any new technology and saying "it's more expensive than the way we do things now, so it always will be more expensive, so it won't work". Do I really need to point out the flaw here?
Your comment:
A machine that only builds one thing is going to produce that one thing faster and cheaper than a machine that can build anything. That's true even of theoretical nanoassembly systems.
No it isn't. Or to use your words - what is the basis for that assertion? A nano-assembler is a nanoassembler, whether it's in a factory or a suburban nano-shop or your basement. Why would we build a nanoasembler that is only able to build one thing?
Sure, I can imagine a big assembler being able to produce goods faster than a small one (it can literally churn out more per second because it is bigger and can suck in and push out more material), but why significantly cheaper?
Besides, this misses the point - with widespread nanotech, the very concept of mass-produced identical items is redundant. Why would we do this? Why fill warehouses with product X and then try to sell it, as we do now? Heck, we're moving away from that model even with current technology, why do it that way with nanotech?
Items could be produced that are individually tailored to the user, and only when needed by the user. These items may cost a little more than an identical item that had been mass-produced, but items tailored to me are not going to be mass-produced, so the comparison is moot.
As nano-tech becomes possible, cheaper, and widespread, the advantages of just-in-time and just-for-you manufacturing will outweigh the advantages of mass-produced for-everyone, I predict. There are other things to worry about (like how to prevent abuse of cheap widespread nanotech assemblers).
Skevos
The real irony in this to me isn't that it's been done. I've known about 3D Printers for a while.
... oh ... uh ... right about now.
What really blew my mind reading the article is the fact that this morning I turned in a 10 page report for my Production Operations Management class, and in that report I specifically mention 3D Printers and how they would be used for this very thing before too long.
Little did I know "before too long" was going to be
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Unless you're building something with complicated interior structure, a computer-controlled milling machine can do the job.
In the real world, though, most manufactured objects are made by some mould-based process; casting, stamping, injection moulding, or another of the fifty or so common processes for making stuff in quantity. Few objects made in volume are machined out of solid stock. It's too slow, by orders of magnitude.
C'mon, sex sells :)
You could even do those mammalian versions they sell for a couple K...
-- Ender, Duke_of_URL
You want really cool?
How about a computer using a simulated environment to evolve a simulated robot, then using a 3d printer to build the robot, and it works!
Now THAT is cool.
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!
Mr. Fusion, of course!
science is a religion
And heck, you can throw a full one (water bottle) off a cliff and it just bounces on the ground healthy as can be. I've done it and it's a bunch of fun.