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."
...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.
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
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
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
"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
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?
Yes, probably a temporary replacement, but don't count out what polymers can do.
Some years ago I was told of a project to make a plastic clip for an overhead window (sunroof for houses). The window manufacturer was quite concerned about the strength and had the perception that any and all plastics were not likely to be good enough. Eventually the material used was a tougher nylon, with something like 30% glass fiber reinforcement.
When the first pieces were tried there was an attempt to break them, to show that "mere plastic" just would not do. Sure enough the piece disassembled and a chunk went flying across the room. As comments were being made about inferior product someone retrieved the broken part. The nylon had held, but a steel pin had not. There were no more arguments about 'cheap plastic' from then on.
While glass fiber reinforcement is probably out for this 3-D printing, polycarbonate is some pretty tough stuff (but subject to chemical attack by a few common things..) and plastics can be recycled. This may make much sense in space applications. If a part is needed, make it, and put the old part back into the source mix and use the molecules over again.
I don't subscribe to RMS's GNUtopian vision.
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.
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.
Sorry, the formula for Snapple[TM] is copyrighted - replicating Snapple[TM] is a violation of the DMCA and you will face 25 years in prison just for thinking about it, courtesy of Snapple[TM] Beverage Corp[TM].
In response to this growing threat to our freedoms, the FSF has launched a new Lemon Iced Tea project which will be licensed under the GPL, and RMS is already preparing his "Why it should be referred to as GNU/Iced Tea" whitepaper.
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 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
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.
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
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.
Buy your own machine. You said you're into modeling. That's what these are made for. Their smaller solutions are only a couple grand for a scanner & printer. Just over a grand if you only want the printer. Very cool stuff.
-Ryan, with the unoriginal sig
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.