Slashdot Mirror
Car Produced With a 3D Printer
Lanxon writes "A prototype for an electric vehicle — code named Urbee — is the first to have its entire body built with a 3D printer, reports Wired. Stratasys and Winnipeg engineering group Kor Ecologic have partnered to create the electric/liquid fuel hybrid, which can deliver more than 200 miles per gallon on the motorway and 100 miles per gallon in the city."
You wouldn't steal a car.
But would you download one?
I wrote parts of this stuff
Don't discount it. Once the technology improves, this could be a way of making less expensive, much stronger bodies for vehicles. You could then put whatever engine/suspension you wanted under them.
It could provide the opposite approach taken by the Trexa EV.
Living With a Nerd
why does the picture in the article look like a still from a low rez video of a photograph of a badly-photoshopped computer rendering?
i could live a little longer in this prison
Once the technology improves, this could be a way of making less expensive, much stronger bodies for vehicles.
Not sure about that, but am certain that it would simplify life for repairmen. It took about three weeks to obtain a mysterious minor little trim piece by the front grill for my wife's Toyota about a year ago. (the bracket-y thing by the fog lights ish area) Life would be a lot simpler if you could just print a replacement.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
The material used in the stratasys printers is ABS, it's a production grade resin. We have two of these rapid prototyping machines at work, and what they can do is amazing. The biggest problem with these devices is that they have fairly low tolerances usually around .005"(.1mm) and contoured part surfaces are fairly rough. That can be fixed with a little sanding/subtractive machining though.
The capability to think something up and have it in your hands within hours without involving skilled machinists is incredible.
The two-passenger hybrid aims to be fuel efficient, easy to repair, safe to drive and inexpensive to own.
Nothing about that picture, from the low driver orientation to the tin-can size, exudes safety.
Even the picture from their homepage looks horrible.
As a threat to interstate commerce? Kinda like telling the farmers they can't grow their own animal feed? If you think that self publishing artists are a threat to the industry, wait until you have everybody self replicating everything they need.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
No. For that you would need a 4D printer.
Technoli
Actually, solving these issues are maybe the single most important political issue to shape the economic face that the 21st century will have.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Now, some enterprising person could build a car body from scratch and truly verify if Adam and Jaime got it right.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Please stop blaming all problems of your aoutomotive industries to 30 year old regulation. Other manufacturers are able to build energy efficient front wheel drive cars with a pretty good performance. If yours don't, blame their lack of innovation.
Oh, and light trucks are probably large and not whimpy, but definately not fast. Which implies "not fun".
You only do this stuff for prototype, not production due to cost.
Umm, yeah, that's exactly what the article said they did. Built the prototype. Summary of the summary: "Prototype built using only prototyping machine." Other than the sanding and painting, of course.
Nothing is said in the article about the actual production car if and when it ever gets past the prototype stage.
I'm 100% certain they aren't going to be stupid enough to go to production using a prototyping machine. You're absolutely correct, though cost is not the only factor (speed would be one, and durability of materials would be another).
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Naw, we can just torrent the part specs from Car-PirateBay.com and get em for free. Additionally the torrented parts have stripped out the DRM that requires the printer to use substandard plastics and intentionally place flaws and weak spots in the printing pattern to ensure a frequent replacement rate.
But then the AMIAA (Automobile Manufacturing Industry Association of America) will start suing random VIN numbers hoping to catch part-pirates.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
Don't go thinking that you'll be able to just print replacement parts. 3D printing/reprapping is going to be as encumbered by copyright issues as video and audio is.
It's already completely legal to create knockoff replacement parts and to sell them with information stating their application so long as you do not misrepresent yourself as the company which made the originals, for example by improper use of their logos. This is already done for body parts, sensor/sender units which basically consist of a potentiometer wrapped up in some custom plastic, trim pieces, window seals, glass pieces, and basically every other piece (including interior trim) where there is sufficient demand to create a lookalike.
Or in other words, this problem has already been addressed where it applies to automotive parts, and it is not the issue you claim it to be.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Another attractive feature of additive manufacturing(3d printing refers to a specific additive manufacturing process) is that it's more efficient to additively manufacture exceptionally strong materials like TiAl6V4 and than it is to machine them. As exceptionally strong materials tend to be hard to machine, because they're exceptionally strong! In addition, making "impossible" shapes might be advantageous. Hollow impossible to make cellular truss structures can have around twice the specific strength and specific stiffness of bulk material. Also additive manufacturing can be used for production, in fact the new joint strike fighter could have additively manufactured parts in it. In addition this is being done because it's cheaper(as in ~$10 million cheaper) to make them this way. Though, if you want a nice shiny surface finish you'll need to do post-processing....
Two links for videos of fixing something at home with a 3D printer:
"YouTube - Better Living With MakerBot - Episode 1: Kitchen Lamp"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzyZSVK_Gs
"Better Living with MakerBot - Episode 2: The Wall Socket "
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9tnqHS2vFo
You could recycle plastic you already have with better home technology, in theory. Just like you can build a machine shop from "scrap":
http://www.lindsaybks.com/dgjp/index.html
What does it mean to say it is "cheaper" to mass produce things than print them on demand if you need to incur costs when you store them, ship them around, wait for them, secure them, deal with sending back wrong orders, keep track of stuff, and still need to repair and replace stuff on demand anyway? If that made sense, why do people have 2D printers at home when it is probably "cheaper" in some sense to print everything at a large central facility and have it mailed to you in boxes once a month?
If your 3D printer breaks, you ask your friend to print you a replacement part. Or you use another 3D printer you have at home. What do you do when you misconfigure a Debian system and it won't boot? You use another computer to surf the web looking for a solution and to create a boot CD-ROM or boot USB Flash drive.
Anyway, maybe it is good that it is "just a hobby" (even as that is not quite true), because 3D printers are part of ushering in "the end of work (as we know it)".
Related group I'm involved with:
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Those aren't real klein bottles, they are just the closest approximation that we can make. A real klein bottle doesn't pass through itself, it passes around its own exterior though a fourth dimension.
Technoli
Well, I think transcending irony is the most important issue. :-) ... irony. :-)"
http://www.pdfernhout.net/recognizing-irony-is-a-key-to-transcending-militarism.html
"There is a fundamental mismatch between 21st century reality and 20th century security thinking. Those "security" agencies are using those tools of abundance, cooperation, and sharing mainly from a mindset of scarcity, competition, and secrecy. Given the power of 21st century technology as an amplifier (including as weapons of mass destruction), a scarcity-based approach to using such technology ultimately is just making us all insecure. Such powerful technologies of abundance, designed, organized, and used from a mindset of scarcity could well ironically doom us all whether through military robots, nukes, plagues, propaganda, or whatever else... Or alternatively, as Bucky Fuller and others have suggested, we could use such technologies to build a world that is abundant and secure for all. So, while in the past, we had "nothing to fear but fear itself", the thing to fear these days is ironcially
But copyright might come second? :-)
http://www.pdfernhout.net/open-letter-to-grantmakers-and-donors-on-copyright-policy.html
http://www.pdfernhout.net/on-funding-digital-public-works.html
http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/1e499c6db59117a2?hl=en&
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
Even as I agree with your point: http://www.robots-dreams.com/2010/02/3d-printing-robot-parts-is-a-reality-already-video.html ... Well, now we have a great example to actually show them..."
"We often get into discussions and debates about the potential for 3D printing, especially as it relates to robotics. We tend to take the positive side of the debate, and paint a rosy picture of what we believe to be a not-too-distant future where researchers, developers, and even hobbyists will be able to crank out real-world manifestations of their dream concepts, and test them under practical conditions at reasonable cost and with very short timeframes.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
I dunno, I look out in the parking lot of my employer and I see a mixture of vehicles, but the majority of vehicles are what you label "crappy front wheel drive cars". I've been driving a "crappy front wheel drive car" for a number of years now, and it's eliminated the need for 4WD on my crappy front wheel drive cars, because rear-wheel drive blows hot steaming monkey chunks in any kind of snow or slippery conditions without special tires, but I can do quite nicely using stock 4-season radial tires on my crappy front wheel drive car.
Meanwhile, most of the vehicles I see stuck in snowbanks are large RWD sedans and powerful 4WD SUVs, even though the majority of cars on the road are crappy front wheel drive cars. Why is that, I wonder?
Look, I drove rear-wheel drive cars for a long time, and resisted the switch to front-wheel-drive for years. But as soon as I got into one, I understood why it made sense. I had to re-learn how to handle slippery conditions, but a couple of hours in an abandoned snowy parking lot sorted that issue out, and I was good to go. All of my rear-wheel-drive cars have been garbage in the snow, and/or have been 4WD or AWD capable. I haven't run into any circumstances where front-wheel-drive can't perform acceptably unless the snow is high enough that my car high-centers on it, and at that point all bets are off anyway and I need the ground clearance of my truck.
I want a practical and fun car. I own a pickup truck, but that's only because I need one for plowing and homestead maintenance tasks, and for cases when the snow is too deep for any car but I still have to get to work. My practical and fun car is a crappy front wheel drive car, for very practical and fun values of "crappy".
To each his own, but the majority of people I know have chosen "slow, cramped and wimpy go-carts", also known as "5-passenger, 4-cylinder, front-wheel-drive sedans capable of 35+ MPG" for their daily driving. These aren't just hippies, or at least the guys with the Limbaugh mugs on their desks might be offended if you called them that. Be my guest, but just understand that it might get violent.
It's all about the Benjamins. If I can get to work in my current 40MPG car that performs well in the snow, why would I choose a heavy, lumbering, horrible-in-the-snow beast that only gets 20MPG? I drive 16 miles each way to work, every day. That's 160 miles a week. I can do that on about 4 gallons of fuel in my current car, including my three carpoolers, or I can do it on 8 gallons of fuel a week. Hey, at almost $3 a gallon, that's nearly twelve bucks a week I'm saving in fuel using my crappy little front wheel drive car, not to mention the fact that my car was $20,000 and my tires are $75 a pop and my maintenance is very cheap, so I'm saving shitloads more money than just fuel. Sure, my engine (Diesel) only produces 90 HP. Who cares? There's plenty of power to merge on the highway, passing is no problem (drop a gear, spin up the hamsters, and go), and I only stop by the fuel station about once a month.
Putting the drive up front makes sense for daily driving. There are cars available with modern semi-efficient engines and rear-wheel-drive systems, the reason people have by and large converted to crappy front-drive is because it's cheaper to manufacture, more efficient, and for any sort of bad weather pretty much eliminates the need for expensive and complex AWD/4WD systems.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
That not funny. That's a very prophetic. Such a scenario is the future! We live in a world where Intellectual property is worth more in man hours than raw materials themselves.
Life is not for the lazy.
You know what? In other parts of the world we manage to cope with snow and cold weather and other such conditions without resorting to stupid big trucks. Maybe it's just your (in)ability to drive safely that is the issue.
I'm reminded of the Slashdot article about the robot made out of Legos which solves a Rubik's Cube in 12 seconds. Of course, one of the components to this robot is a computer and the computer is not built out of Legos. This is no more a car produced with a 3D printer than that was a robot made out of Legos.
But the the headline "Parts of Car which it is Possible for 3D Printers to Produce, Produced With a 3D Printer" doesn't have that same ring to it.
Don't go thinking that you'll be able to just print replacement parts. 3D printing/reprapping is going to be as encumbered by copyright issues as video and audio is.
It's already completely legal to create knockoff replacement parts and to sell them with information stating their application so long as you do not misrepresent yourself as the company which made the originals, for example by improper use of their logos. This is already done for body parts, sensor/sender units which basically consist of a potentiometer wrapped up in some custom plastic, trim pieces, window seals, glass pieces, and basically every other piece (including interior trim) where there is sufficient demand to create a lookalike.
Or in other words, this problem has already been addressed where it applies to automotive parts, and it is not the issue you claim it to be.
I wonder how that applies if the design of the car in question is covered by a patent
Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
No. You will be able to print your own toner!!
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Naw, we can just torrent the part specs from Car-PirateBay.com and get em for free. Additionally the torrented parts have stripped out the DRM that requires the printer to use substandard plastics and intentionally place flaws and weak spots in the printing pattern to ensure a frequent replacement rate.
And they'll call it, grand piracy auto.
The lawyers will make a mess of themselves just thinking about it.
But that only applies to parts made using the Analog Hole. Proper digital copies made using a "computer" are entirely different, and need special protections.
You are missing the point. That is how it is today because we don't have good 3D printers in every home. When we do, and physical items become as copyable as bits, the issue becomes completely different and the ideas we have about such issues now will be challenged. That is an event in the future and potentially bad outcomes of that are also in the future. It is meaningless for the matter at hand that we have avoided those bad outcomes before the event. As an example of what will happen, just see Belial6 in this very thread calling for "special protections".
In this case, function (Aerodynamics) dictates form.
My question is:
200 motorway, 100 city? This is FAR worse than the typical performance hit you see for conventional vehicles, and is abysmal for a hybrid. (Regenerative braking means you should pay very little penalty in city fuel economy, and if air resistance dominates your energy expenditures, city might even be more efficient due to the lower speeds involved.)
Also:
Is that on a pure hybrid cycle, or is that with the "electric cheat" of saying a plug-in hybrid gets (insane number) miles to the gallon (however, the number is highly dependent on driving patterns and what portion of the energy is from plugin charge vs. from liquid fuel)
Last but not least:
Does this vehicle meet all United States crash safety standards? Most of these "super high mileage" hybrids don't, so we'll never see mileage numbers like that in a real road-legal vehicle.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Exactly! And the next thing you know the RIAA will be cracking down on people pirating cars over torrents and printing them at home.
"To prevent this day from getting any worse, I'll just read ERROR as GOOD THING" 1GJU8xLuDKDxEs4KLf8fAGyptoDsqvEsBT