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."
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.
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
This is cool.
Reading the novel of 2001 it said that Discovery had 2 or 3 spare parts for every piece on the ship.
With a replicator/printer like this you can estimate how many of which parts might fail, send up X amount of polycarbonate/Aluminum/Steel and a 3D "Printer" along with spares for other things that can't be replicated, thus saving alot of space that might otherwise be taken up by spare "replicatable" parts.
I can see this also being of great benefit to the Navy and Air Force for replicating complex CAD designed airframe parts instead of waiting for a replacement to be flown in by COD or Airlift. The USAF Europe had a fleet of little cargo aircraft just for flying parts around Europe.
Why ship a LHA or LST to Korea with bins full of nuts, bolts, screws that might not be used and will just sit there and get lost or rust when you can ship 3D printers and bulk materials and fabricate them on the fly?
could you define replicate? I worked at a Goodyear tire plant where this thing was used. If you wanted a pint of your favorite ale, you could build the cup, and the liquid in your favorite CAD program, and the device would do it's best to match every detail, including the weight. to make items lighter it would put appropriatly sized gaps in the fab material. the lighter it needed to be the bigger the whole. It was a pretty cool deal.
I bet it could make a replica so real that you could pick it up in one hand, and your real Guinness in the other, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference until you put one to your lips.
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.
The fabricators are pretty expensive, and the amortized cost of the machine + materials is probably much greater than the replacement parts.
However, consider that an assembly line has thousands of different parts like this. The cost of keeping spares of every part around is much higher than the cost of just the failed parts. If you can just fabricate the part you need on the spot, you reduce downtime vs. waiting for a replacement part. On a high volume assembly line, my guess is the cost of a few of hours less downtime can pay for the prototyping machine.
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.
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.