Geek Tool: Slashdot Video of Award Winning 3D Printer From CES

where is the video??? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 01:52 · Score: 0, Insightful

huh?

Re:where is the video??? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:22 · Score: 1, Informative

Looks like it is hosted at ooyala.com and NoScript may be blocking it.
Re:where is the video??? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 10:52 · Score: 0

There's no video, just a useless black square with something about "flash".
I guess these guys never heard of HTML5.
Re:where is the video??? by wiedzmin · 2012-01-14 05:21 · Score: 1

The video showed exactly nothing about the device itself. Just some dude who vaguely resembles a cartoon-strip character yapping about how great it is with the device running in the background, with occasional close-up of its moving parts. You didn't miss much.

--
Bow before me, for I am root.

Non biodegradable? by jythie · 2012-01-13 01:55 · Score: 1, Interesting

I wonder if it can also support non-biodegradable materials too. Biodegradable is not always a good thing for durable/non-disposable things.

Re:Non biodegradable? by ZankerH · 2012-01-13 01:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

But it's meant precisely for disposable, non-durable crap that currently only comes in non-biodegradable, chinese-slave made form.
Re:Non biodegradable? by jythie · 2012-01-13 02:03 · Score: 1, Interesting

Seems kinda limiting. When I look at these machines I see the potential to make all sorts of stuff that normally I would have to contract out to a machine shop (which for 1 or 2 of an item is not very cost effective)... but if the thing is going to start breaking down after a few months or years that kinda limits applications.
Re:Non biodegradable? by ThosLives · 2012-01-13 02:04 · Score: 1, Offtopic

This entirely. When a MakerBot can start making things out of engineering materials capable of handing meaningful loads and temperatures (metal and ceramic, perhaps some high-performance plastics) then we have something.
I'd also like to see a MakerBot that can produce more general consumer goods, such as shoes, clothing, and other tools.
Of course, if many people have a general-purpose micro factory in their homes, then much of the world economy will be in for a new shock - and commodities prices and raw materials shipping industries will be quite interesting.

--
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
Re:Non biodegradable? by bartoku · 2012-01-13 02:06 · Score: 5, Informative

In the makerbot store there are ABS, PLA, and water soluble PVA filament spools.
I assume ABS is the plastic we are used to seeing everywhere that is fairly durable and water proof and that the water soluble PVA is the corn product he talked about in the video.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Sqweegee · 2012-01-13 02:11 · Score: 1

It can print with non-biodegradable plastics like ABS too, the same stuff used for lego bricks.
Everyone plugs their bio-friendly products these days, and some designs on these could produce a significant amount of waste.
Re:Non biodegradable? by bWareiWare.co.uk · 2012-01-13 02:20 · Score: 2

The is no issue of PLA spontaneously biodegrading, you have to compost it fairly carefully. (No idea if this is as green as it sounds, it gives off a lot of CO2, recycling should be preferable but the infrastructure isn't yet in place).
Re:Non biodegradable? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:20 · Score: 1

Have a look at reprap.org
Printers like this typically print PLA (the biodegradable stuff in the video) or ABS (a more permanent, non-biodegradable) plastic.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Zerth · 2012-01-13 02:20 · Score: 5, Informative

PLA is corn based.
PVA(polyvinyl alcohol) is made from polyvinyl acetate, which is made from ethylene, which is made from steam cracking petroleum. Not very renewable, but good as a wash-away support material.
Re:Non biodegradable? by lochnessie · 2012-01-13 02:28 · Score: 5, Informative

Seems kinda limiting. When I look at these machines I see the potential to make all sorts of stuff that normally I would have to contract out to a machine shop (which for 1 or 2 of an item is not very cost effective)... but if the thing is going to start breaking down after a few months or years that kinda limits applications.
The two standard printing materials for the RepRap family of printers (and their descendants, like the MakerBot) are the biodegradable PLA, and standard petroleum-based ABS. PLA will degrade over time, but only under certain environmental conditions; it's unlikely to fall apart in normal use (most industrial thermophilic composting processes run at pretty high temperatures (60C and up). I guess you probably shouldn't use it to print an industrial composter.
ABS is ABS, and whatever you make with it will be around forever, so print your PLA composter with this instead.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:44 · Score: 1

Look at these two "extreme" 3D printers:
D-shape technology:
http://vimeo.com/29288417 (password is "moon")
Markus Kayser system:
http://vimeo.com/25401444
Cheers,
Giovanni
Re:Non biodegradable? by El+Torico · 2012-01-13 02:47 · Score: 4, Interesting

There are other devices that use ceramics, metals, or plastics. There are about 30 companies that make some form of additive manufacturing device using different processes like Selective Laser Sintering, Fused Deposition Modeling, and 3D Printing. This is a new industrial revolution that's just getting started. With these devices you can make small production runs cost effective and efficient. Also, these processes produce far less waste, so they use less material and energy.
As for consumer goods, I haven't seen clothing, but there are a lot of interesting items being designed for everyday use on Shapeways.
I've been following Additive Manufacturing since I read the article "Print me a Stradivarius" in the Economist. I expect this to be as significant as the Internet.

--
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Kleen13 · 2012-01-13 03:39 · Score: 4, Informative

When a MakerBot can start making things out of engineering materials capable of handing meaningful loads and temperatures (metal and ceramic, perhaps some high-performance plastics) then we have something.
I have to say, to be able to quickly prototype a model and get a hands-on form fit and function before going to the machine shop with these is golden, this technology has already saved my company buckets of money.

--
That sinking feeling deep in your gut when you KNOW you screwed up bad summed up with: {head desk} {head desk}
Re:Non biodegradable? by Niko. · 2012-01-13 03:51 · Score: 5, Interesting

i know a couple of people who use 3d printers. when they want to make parts that need to be stronger than the PLA/ABS raw material, they "simply" print the model, use it to make a mold and cast the mold with bronze or copper or what have you.
it stops being an all-in-one solution but still allows detailed custom shapes with good strength and appearance.
Re:Non biodegradable? by montyzooooma · 2012-01-13 03:51 · Score: 2, Funny

such as shoes, clothing
Seems like overkill for these when you can already create an infinite variety of shoes and clothing with nothing but a bunch of plastic garbage bags and a roll of duct tape.
Re:Non biodegradable? by jank1887 · 2012-01-13 04:03 · Score: 4, Informative

Similar technology, much better materials: www.stratasys.com
of course, the 'good machines' cost as much as my house. the high precision ABS ones are ~50k or less, though. Build temperature is a big part of it. most of them, the build area is a furnace to keep environmental temperature right for layer-to-layer adhesion. there's only so much you can do with only a heated nozzle. and they have to very carefully control material quality to get the build resolution and accuracy they give, so there are humidity controls, etc. high precision motors and controllers are a big deal, too.
Re:Non biodegradable? by psydeshow · 2012-01-13 05:55 · Score: 1

when they want to make parts that need to be stronger than the PLA/ABS raw material, they "simply" print the model, use it to make a mold and cast the mold with bronze or copper or what have you.
This. If you're only looking at the initial printing material you're missing out on how that combines with existing manufacturing processes -- it's now possible to make *anything* using a digital 3D model as a starting point. Which means rapid prototyping, version control, download-distribution, and infinite repeatability.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Ihmhi · 2012-01-13 06:28 · Score: 1

I personally look forward to the trolling.
First we had black faxes. Then we had spam mail. Now we'll have three-dimensional, biodegradable genitalia.

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:Non biodegradable? by mrchaotica · 2012-01-13 07:00 · Score: 1

There's no reason you couldn't get the ethylene somewhere else, of course (for example, it's released by ripening fruit).

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:Non biodegradable? by mounthood · 2012-01-13 07:11 · Score: 1

I expect this to be as significant as the Internet.
I disagree. Utility is very low factor in the sale of most items, and something us geeks focus on more then most. For example, the shopping categories from the shapeways.com website is almost all toys and trinkets.
* Holiday Gift Guide
* Featured
* Art
* Gadgets
* Home Decor
* Jewelry
* Hobby
Marketing and branding is a major hurdle opposed to the home creation of small items. There's an industry that will marginalize such items as 'cheap' and 'purely utilitarian' (meaning they lack emotion!?) and 'poor quality' and 'poor design' and on and on.

--
tomorrow who's gonna fuss
Re:Non biodegradable? by El+Torico · 2012-01-13 07:29 · Score: 1

You should read the article that I referred to in my original post since it gives a much better explanation of the subject than I did. I agree that the Shapeways site doesn't have that much by way of utility, but it's just a small part of what's going on in the field.

--
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
Re:Non biodegradable? by BeaverCleaver · 2012-01-13 08:57 · Score: 4, Funny

I already *have* three-dimensional, biodegradeable genitalia,

--
sustainable living
Re:Non biodegradable? by Zerth · 2012-01-13 10:04 · Score: 1

Nope, no reason you couldn't acquire it by several other means. I'll restate: most ethylene used in the production of polyvinyl acetate comes from steam cracking petroleum.
Indeed, most ethylene used in commercial ripening procedures to forcibly ripen fruit comes from ethanol. But that method isn't significantly used in the commercial production of PVA, to my knowledge.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 11:08 · Score: 0

Non industrial computer would be air+soil. Its besterest.
Re:Non biodegradable? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 12:02 · Score: 1

Yep. You're not limited to PLA. It can utilize ABS, Polymorph, HDPE, PP directly. Metal objects are printed using a binder to hold metal powder together until you can put it in a curing oven and furnace. The Metal objects are obviously much harder to do at home given the extra equipment required to do it. imaterialise has a very good video on metal printing.
Anyways, while 3d printing is still far from printing everything, it is nice given how many things we do use that are plastic. Especially if you need to replicate difficult to find or expensive parts (Such as proprietary automotive connectors or trim pieces).

how much by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 01:58 · Score: 0

How much do the cartridges cost?

Re:how much by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:33 · Score: 0

I see what you did there...
Re:how much by Sporkinum · 2012-01-13 04:54 · Score: 1

They are spools.. $41 and up for 1kg. The spools look like weed whacker reels. I wonder if they would work? They certainly would be a lot cheaper.

--
"He's lost in a 'floyd hole"

I'm glad I could disable ads by wisebabo · 2012-01-13 01:59 · Score: 1

Because they kept on overlapping on the right side of the video. If you've got good Karma, disable the ads!

So how much is this (and the feedstock)? When will it be available? Actually the second question is probably moot, it's so cool it'll probably be sold out for a long time (at least until it can it self replicate to make more! :)

Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Simon+Brooke · 2012-01-13 02:04 · Score: 5, Informative

Read TFL. It's available now, it costs $1,749.00, and the feedstock costs about fifty dollars a spool.

--
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by PerlJedi · 2012-01-13 02:10 · Score: 4, Informative

The original V1 Thing-o-Matic costs around $1,100, but I'm guessing V2 will be more expensive than that, among other reasons, because of the dual-extruder.
Actually, forget the guess, here are some links: http://store.makerbot.com/thing-o-matic-kit-mk7.html
http://store.makerbot.com/makerbot-pva-1kg-spool.html
http://store.makerbot.com/replicator-404.html
If that is just too much, I would recomend finding a local area maker space (as many of them have these, and cost of joining is similar to that of a gym. Here is the one in Michigan I belong to:
Maker-Works
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Aladrin · 2012-01-13 02:16 · Score: 1

Yes, but how many Stephen Colbert heads do you get per spool?
My problem with these 3d techs online is that there's no good way to know exactly how much you can DO with a given amount of raw material. At some point, i'm going to have to break down and purchase things, just to get a baseline on cost.
He claims in the video that the material is so cheap you can just give things to friends and print more, but... Somehow, I doubt it's that cheap.

--
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:21 · Score: 4, Informative

Yes, but how many Stephen Colbert heads do you get per spool?
My problem with these 3d techs online is that there's no good way to know exactly how much you can DO with a given amount of raw material. At some point, i'm going to have to break down and purchase things, just to get a baseline on cost.
He claims in the video that the material is so cheap you can just give things to friends and print more, but... Somehow, I doubt it's that cheap.
Learn to calculate volume - the material is consumed based on how much volume goes into your part.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by wisebabo · 2012-01-13 02:30 · Score: 1

Thanks for the info!
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by camperdave · 2012-01-13 02:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

My problem with these 3d techs online is that there's no good way to know exactly how much you can DO with a given amount of raw material.
You don't worry about how many bowls of cereal you can get out of a carton of milk, or how many sandwiches you can make from a jar of marmalade, or how many sheets of paper you can print with a toner cartridge. It all depends on how much product you apply per item. Having said that, a 1kilo spool of ABS filament costs about $40, and a good CAD program will tell you the volume of an object. So, how many Lego pieces (ABS plastic) are there in a kilo?

--
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by argStyopa · 2012-01-13 03:02 · Score: 1, Insightful

"You don't worry about how many bowls of cereal you can get out of a carton of milk, or how many sandwiches you can make from a jar of marmalade, or how many sheets of paper you can print with a toner cartridge"
Well, actually, you DO. That's EXACTLY what you do calculate to determine 'value', it's just that the average consumer knows roughly what those values are intutively, or guesses so from the packaging and experience. For printer cartridges, "pages printed" is actually in fact the primary metric of value.
If suddenly someone said that they wanted to charge the same price for a 'carton' of milk, but the carton was 1c / 200ml, you'd say that's bullshit because you know how big a 'carton' is in your local commercial context.
The point is that so far in the discussion, the quantity of stock in the cartridge (until your post) wasn't mentioned, still leaving people up in the air estimating something for which they had no common reference. The website's down, and I'm still not clear from your post if you're really stating that their feedstock cartridge is $40 and 1kg, or just that 'abs filament' is $40/kg....because clearly if they're printing color, their 'cartridges' are going to have to include more than just raw plastic.

--
-Styopa
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 03:10 · Score: 0

Ane here's one in Kansas City:
http://www.c3kc.org/
There's lots of printers there--couple makerbots, few repraps. Just getting ready to start on one myself :)
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Aladrin · 2012-01-13 03:46 · Score: 2

Actually, the filament is colored. That's how it 'prints in color' and why it takes 2 heads to print in 2 colors.
I was asking for more details because the last time I looked into 3D printing, the ABS filament seemed to cost enough that printing things for fun, but screwing up, seemed to be a very costly mistake. The video, however, says it's cheap enough that you won't care.
Obviously, some of my data is wrong, but I don't know which yet.
And you're right, I do care how many bowls of cereal I get from a milk carton. I may not know the exact amount in my head, but I have an estimate since I've been eating cereal since I was young. I have never printed anything in 3D, though, so I have no idea what kind of volume something would have, or how much that would cost.

--
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Bob-taro · 2012-01-13 03:53 · Score: 1

Yes, but how many Stephen Colbert heads do you get per spool?
My problem with these 3d techs online is that there's no good way to know exactly how much you can DO with a given amount of raw material. At some point, i'm going to have to break down and purchase things, just to get a baseline on cost.
He claims in the video that the material is so cheap you can just give things to friends and print more, but... Somehow, I doubt it's that cheap.
The raw material is plastic wire. It is melted and molded, not really "consumed", so I expect you could easily calculate how much plastic a given print will require. The other main resource is electricity, and I think these things output a fairly constant volume / hour, so again, you just need to know the volume.

--
Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by clyde_cadiddlehopper · 2012-01-13 04:00 · Score: 1

About 400.

--
Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by clyde_cadiddlehopper · 2012-01-13 04:01 · Score: 2

So, how many Lego pieces (ABS plastic) are there in a kilo?
About 400

--
Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by dbc · 2012-01-13 04:51 · Score: 3, Interesting

Yes, exactly. Even the ancient s/w I am running on my Makerbot Cupcake calculates the cc's of material that will be consumed by a print.
This looks pretty cool, but I see the build envelope is 225mm x 150mm x 150mm ..... I really want 300mm x 150mm..... oh well......
These are outstandingly good humor -- my daughter draws up toys and doll house furniture and stuff in SolidWorks and prints them. I do robot parts. Great fun.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 05:16 · Score: 0

I have never printed anything in 3D, though, so I have no idea what kind of volume something would have, or how much that would cost.
Your CAD software should be able to work out the volume/mass of the object you want to print. ABS's density is 1.04 grams per cubic centimeter. I have no idea about the density of that corn based stuff, though.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by EvilGrin5000 · 2012-01-13 05:17 · Score: 1

Yes, but how many Stephen Colbert heads do you get per spool?
My problem with these 3d techs online is that there's no good way to know exactly how much you can DO with a given amount of raw material. At some point, i'm going to have to break down and purchase things, just to get a baseline on cost.
He claims in the video that the material is so cheap you can just give things to friends and print more, but... Somehow, I doubt it's that cheap.
Learn to calculate volume - the material is consumed based on how much volume goes into your part.
I think he wants to know how much plastic is in 1 kilo of spool. From what I could find, ABS density is roughly 1.05g/cm^3 and PVA is 1.19-1.31g/cm^3 which means that:
1000g is roughly 952.380952cm^3 of ABS plastic
OR
1000g is roughly 800cm^3 of PVA plastic (with 1.25g/cm^3 density)
Now your answer applies where depending on how big a Stephen Colbert design is, it takes more or less of the material: a 1cm^3 Colbert would give you 952 ABS heads or 800 PVA heads. Now THAT'S a lot of Colbert!

--
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 05:36 · Score: 0

how many ... are there in a kilo?
Exactly 1000 ;-)
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 05:51 · Score: 0

That's also assuming a solid part. 3d printed parts are generally printed with solid outer walls and loose infill, configurable as a percentage based on how strong you want your part to be. For a non-mechanical part like a colbert head, you can easily get away with 20% infill.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Aladrin · 2012-01-13 05:58 · Score: 1

Is there some software I can use without owning a machine, so I can design a few things and find out what they'd cost?

--
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by dbc · 2012-01-13 06:44 · Score: 1

Yes, Skeinforge is open source. The whole tool chain is open source. But really, the cost of the plastic is minimal. And it is easy to estimate by weight, anyway. Go find a pile of Lego or any other plastic stuff that is about the same volume of plastic as the widget you want to make. Weigh it on a postage scale. Look at the cost of a 5 pound spool of the plastic they sell you. Do the math, it is easy. Also, remember that on most prints there is only a solid shell, and the interior is about 10% fill honeycomb. So often, taking the volume of your thingy and dividing by 9 or 10 is a reasonable estimate of the volume of plastic consumed.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Em+Adespoton · 2012-01-13 12:54 · Score: 1

Hmm... so if you're buying a 40kg spool, that's 16,000 Lego pieces for $1800.
400 pieces of Lego are $30. That's $1200 for 16,000 Lego pieces.
So, for an extra 66% markup, you get the ability to customize each piece. That's about the same markup you get from Lego, and they custom screen the pieces and have multiple colors.
Gives a good perspective, anyway.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Em+Adespoton · 2012-01-13 12:56 · Score: 1

Heh... but I left out the part about the savings you get after the first spool.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-14 03:15 · Score: 0

Also keep in mind that material usage goes towards structural volume, not total volume. So by making things hollow inside you can get a lot more economy. Of course hollow structures make it a bit more tricky to calculate the volume of material used.
Thus you decide on the trade-off: Solid, durable, and expensive (at least material-wise) vs. hollow, flimsy, and cheap.
Making working parts (ie: gears, wheels, etc.) isn't exactly going to be cheap with this process until the feed-stock becomes cheap, because they usually don't hold up too well going the cheap route. (Cutting cost by making itty-bitty working parts is also likely hard to do because of printing resolution vs. tolerances.) The current status quo (in the typical consumer price-range) is still better suited to making mostly non-functional knick-knacks when looking at the economy of the materials.
Just for your info on pricing and economics of this process, I tried making a decent plastic wheel with a hex-spline hub in a common size found on R/C 4x4s at Shapeways. Why? Curiosity mostly. That sucker cost around $80 there. A single wheel and just the rim without a tire. You could buy 4 wheels that size and type with comparable quality made the typical way with tires included at a hobby store for under $14.
Re:I'm glad I could disable ads by Applekid · 2012-01-14 04:41 · Score: 1

Yes, but how many Stephen Colbert heads do you get per spool?
My problem with these 3d techs online is that there's no good way to know exactly how much you can DO with a given amount of raw material.
Untrue.
First you have a CAD model, which you can calculate worst-case amount of material. Then the model gets sliced so that the printer knows how to draw each layer. Nobody that prints does so with 100% infill, most cross sections are filled with a web of plastic at about 20% - 40%, sometimes even hollow. I like 30% and it's plenty strong: especially with honeycomb fills instead of just straight lines.
The slicing process is more than just snapping cross-sections but rather describes an entire toolpath (gcode) along with a calibrated extrusion distance for the filament. Calibration being volume of plastic per mm of filament intake, with fine adjustments for bridges and start/stop cycles for multiple islands. The upshot of this is, at the end of generating the gcode you have a very precise accounting for the amount of plastic used. Now, one could argue that the length of plastic used isn't as useful as mass, but everything you need can be calculated from that length.
The de-facto slicer, Skeinforge, will even happily calculate the cost of raw materials when it's done, if you provide it with a cost per kg.
Now, the real factor in my mind is TIME. I've printed out a compact storage case for a board game, a small base, about 100mm^2 x 60mm total not discounting for holes where I actually store the cards and things, and it took about 10 hours to print at 0.1 mm layer height, 50mm/s drawing speed, 300mm/s travel speed (on an Ultimaker, which is probably closer to a RepRap instead of a Thing-O-Matic design, although closer to the Replicator design). I could have printed at a more coarse layer height, sure, but I had the feeler gauges and things calibrated extremely well for 0.1mm so I just left it.
10 hours is a pretty long time to stay within earshot of the machine and it takes a lot of faith in the machine to let it running without a human around considering the potential for something to go wrong with heaters and such.
To be fair, I did print off a few plastic octopi for friends, about 40mm^2 x 20mm, in about 30 minutes, not including slicing time and all the time (and plastic) spent practicing, calibrating. But I chalk that up to the cost to generate the experience to become a competent operator.

--
More Twoson than Cupertino

Re:Replicator (TM)? by Aladrin · 2012-01-13 02:06 · Score: 2

It's a replicator, not a self-replicator.

--
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM

Why don't we just call them replicators? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:12 · Score: 0

3D printer, while technically correct, just doesn't sound science fictiony enough.

Re:Why don't we just call them replicators? by White+Flame · 2012-01-13 08:40 · Score: 1

Because it can only replicate shape, not substance.

One step farther away from the Gadget-less Office by retroworks · 2012-01-13 02:14 · Score: 2, Funny

I have enough trouble keeping track of the two-dimensional stuff I print. This is something best left cloud-based.

--
Gently reply

Level of detail by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:21 · Score: 0

What level of detail can this bot produce? Can it make 28mm tabletop wargaming models?

Re:Level of detail by CaptSlaq · 2012-01-13 02:36 · Score: 2

The makerbot website is misbehaving currently, but IIRC it's something like .25mm
Re:Level of detail by Dr_Barnowl · 2012-01-13 03:01 · Score: 1

World of Warcraft ran a promo to get your avatar printed by a ZCorp 3D printer ; the resolution quoted in the video is 1/100th of an inch - which coincidentally is the same as the 0.25mm quoted by a sibling poster.
They aren't 28mm models.. but if it's good enough for Warcraft, maybe it's good enough for Warhammer. Of course, Games Workshop will start demanding DRM for STL files...
Re:Level of detail by Takehiko · 2012-01-13 03:08 · Score: 2

Here you go:
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:11560
Re:Level of detail by simcop2387 · 2012-01-13 03:13 · Score: 2

While I don't know about this particular machine, some of the repraps have been doing some very fine detail models down to 0.01m layer height [1] This combined with I believe about 0.3mm horizontal resolution should let you get some decent detail at 28mm sizes. You might still need to do a little additional clean up (the hot plastic like to make thin strings on some models, and some other minor things like that), to get a finished product but it could easily end up cheaper than some of the prices I've heard of other people paying for things like Warhammer ($4k investment for an army to play with... just go to the dollar store and buy 100 little green army men!). Along with units it'd also work well for doing buildings and other structures, possibly better than for units.
[1] http://blog.reprap.org/2011/12/001-layer-height-on-prusa-mendel.html
Re:Level of detail by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 04:27 · Score: 0

And even worse, Mythic Entertainment will program the MakerBots.
Re:Level of detail by Applekid · 2012-01-14 04:58 · Score: 1

They already sent a DMCA takedown request to Thingiverse to remove two models. Pictures here.
That said, there's more to resolution than layer height. That just affects the vertical resolution. For horizontal resolution, you also need a smaller nozzle. And while you could get them in 0.15mm, you also have to consider swelling (ABS swells more than PLA), clogging (smaller nozzles are less tolerant of dust and impurities), print speed (less plastic per second = increased print times & electricity). Then there's things like overhangs and then you soon realize there's significant work between pressing the print button and painting it.
Once you get it all dialed in, though, you have the potential to print an army out pretty efficiently. You can even print multiple copies (or just plain multiple objects) at once if you want: you're only limited by the build area.

--
More Twoson than Cupertino

But wait. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

Imagine what damage this will do to the industry. Everybody making their own things, nobody buying toys, nobody buying anything. Heavy copyright lawsuits must kick in to prevent this horrible scenario. Every model copyrighted, every 3D printer with online DRM.

Re:But wait. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:44 · Score: 0

I'll wait until it can print me a nice real steak with all proteins perfectly folded and no weird long-term disease-inducing shit in it.
And until it can print me a mobile phone complete with the latest CPU/GPU and battery.
Some boobs would be nice too. ;) ...yes, those things still have a loooong way to go.
But hey, it's a nice start.
Re:But wait. by DrXym · 2012-01-13 03:05 · Score: 2, Interesting

Imagine what damage this will do to the industry
Very little at the moment. Makerbot produced parts look like glorified plastic coil pots, are only available in a handful of materials & colours and are not suitable for applications where they may be put under stress. They're fine for the odd job, e.g. you break some widget and have the time & patience to produce a replacement. It's certainly not going be much use for "pirate" toys or any other goods. Probably cost more to produce the copy than it would the original.
I would see sites like Shapeways posing a larger issue where the quality, finish and range of materials is larger. Some of the stuff on that site could spell danger for traditional manufacturers of stuff like smart phone accessories, jewellry, decorations and so forth where someone could go in and produce a copy which they sell themselves on commission.
Re:But wait. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 03:07 · Score: 0

Finally we're going to see if there really is a Chopstick lobby in DC!
Seriously though, wouldn't need to buy kitchen utensils. Ladle broke? Print new one. Spatula getting old? Print a new one.
I think this tech is a lot closer to a replicator than people give it credit. Yeah, your not getting food out of it, but there are lot of household items you could print off without going to the store. Once it matures anyway.
Re:But wait. by MetalliQaZ · 2012-01-13 03:08 · Score: 1

Oh, you'll wait until science-fiction, is that right? Star Trek or bust.
You go ahead. Me, I'll be using the near-future technology for making tools, mechanical parts, printed logic devices, plates, toys, and wearables while you continue to slog to Walmart.

--
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
Re:But wait. by Dr_Barnowl · 2012-01-13 03:14 · Score: 2

Someone did imagine ; The Diamond Age includes this scenario - all the replicators ("matter compilers") are linked to a network and under heavy DRM. The most successful economic groups control the matter supply (ink cartridges / 3D printer spools / tiny nano-legos). The major plot arc surrounds an attempt to obtain a small scale, self-replicating (on the macro-scale, no grey goo) matter processing technology, in preference to the vast, centralised, proprietary matter processors owned by a few powerful groups.
While there is poverty in the proposed world, it's not as bad as it is today - there are kiosks in the street where you can obtain basic clothes and foodstuffs, thermal blankets, etc, for no charge. What poverty there is remains the result of an oligarchy controlling centralised production systems.
Re:But wait. by ColdWetDog · 2012-01-13 03:47 · Score: 1

Finally we're going to see if there really is a Chopstick lobby in DC!
Seriously though, wouldn't need to buy kitchen utensils. Ladle broke? Print new one. Spatula getting old? Print a new one.
I think this tech is a lot closer to a replicator than people give it credit. Yeah, your not getting food out of it, but there are lot of household items you could print off without going to the store. Once it matures anyway.
Ladle broke? Make a new one.
- Spend an hour or two coming up with a 3D file
- Spend an hour or two messing with the printer
- Spend another hour or two doing it over when you figure out you missed something important.
Versus: Walk down to the local WalMart, Walk through the aisle. Pick from several ladles. Purchase one. Walk home.
More exercise, less hassle.
That's pretty much it at this stage of the game. There are reasons why ladles (and other simple consumer goods) are made in big factories in bulk.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:But wait. by WhyCause · 2012-01-13 04:00 · Score: 1

Read "The Diamond Age" by Neal Stephenson for one imagining of this scenario.
Re:But wait. by simcop2387 · 2012-01-13 04:11 · Score: 2

You can cut that down to half an hour of possibly messing with the printer by just downloading one [1]. As these printers get more common and "standardized" like with the Makerbot Replicator and the Printrbot, it'll soon be less hassle to print one. Though the cost is still higher on the plastic bits to go in, it is being worked on by the reprap people to get the printers to be efficient and as more of them become available the cost of the spools will go down. There's been some work at directly using injection molding pellets but I don't believe it's printed any fruit yet. That alone will get the cost down by about 50% per object.
[1] http://www.thingiverse.com/search?q=spoon
Re:But wait. by tlhIngan · 2012-01-13 05:03 · Score: 2

Imagine what damage this will do to the industry. Everybody making their own things, nobody buying toys, nobody buying anything. Heavy copyright lawsuits must kick in to prevent this horrible scenario. Every model copyrighted, every 3D printer with online DRM.
It's already started happening. The DMCA has been used to take down 3D models.
As with music and movie industries, we're going to see this continue to 3D printing as well. It's only just started, since 3D printing is still a relative novelty for most people and everything's concentrated in just a few providers.
Re:But wait. by lister+king+of+smeg · 2012-01-13 05:16 · Score: 1

oh really? just wait legos will be pirated very quickly i know that if i had a 3d printer i sure would print them. you could also print plastic versions of Erector Set pieces, those were my favourite toys as a kid. and they would be very easily printed and pirated on these devices.

--
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
Re:But wait. by geekoid · 2012-01-13 05:50 · Score: 1

I would be surprised. LEGO is very high quality, precise measurements, mass produced and hollow.
I don't think it will be cheap enough to make to warrant making your own bricks. You're own custom bricks then LEGO doesn't sell? sure.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:But wait. by MattskEE · 2012-01-13 06:10 · Score: 2

just wait legos will be pirated very quickly i know that if i had a 3d printer i sure would print them.
In order to make lego bricks which both hold together firmly and can be easily pried apart requires precision injection molding http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/lego1.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego#Manufacture. 3D printers don't have the tolerance, material strength, nor finish quality required for producing strong tight-tolerance pieces like this. Printing is just a fundamentally different manufacturing process which is good for certain tasks but not this kind of task.
There are stereolithography machines which do additive manufacturing by curing a photosensitive polymer one layer at a time, and these can be quite precise. However they are slow and very expensive to run. They are useful for some specialized tasks like building structures which could not be machined in a single piece using traditional machining equipment due to internal structures. There is little choice of material though as you are limited only to liquids that are photo-curable and you only get to choose one material for a given solid piece. There's no manufacturing revolution here, it's a specialized piece of equipment which produces small quantities of parts at a high price. Useful for prototyping and specialized tasks, not mass production.
Re:But wait. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 06:30 · Score: 0

Arrrgh! You got reality into my 3D printing delusional fairy-tale world! Next to Space Nuttery, 3D printing REALLY brings out the incompetent and childish delusional slashers en masse.
Re:But wait. by W.+Justice+Black · 2012-01-13 07:25 · Score: 1

The guy who staged out the Bible in Legos would have had an easier time of it for sure:
http://thebricktestament.com
He clearly needed to hax0r a bunch of Legos to tell many of the stories...

--
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." --Groucho Marx
Re:But wait. by Solandri · 2012-01-13 07:35 · Score: 1

Heavy copyright lawsuits must kick in to prevent this horrible scenario. Every model copyrighted, every 3D printer with online DRM.
That's what I've been saying. People think all the ruckus about IP laws and copyrights is about books, music, movies, and software. Those are relatively minor compared to what's coming down the road. In the future, when everyone can basically own a fab shop in a box, it's going to be about whether all the physical objects in your house can be created for the cost of materials, or will be heavily encumbered with licensing fees. The IP law we establish in the next 10-20 years is going to heavily impact human standard of living and productivity in the physical world for the next 100+ years.
Re:But wait. by dbc · 2012-01-13 07:44 · Score: 2

Yes. I have a MakerBot Cupcake, and also do injection molding. Lego is extremely precise injection molding. Much more so than typical molded parts, and their molds are very expensive because of that. Super tight tolerance machining and hand polished. There is a reason Lego is expensive. It is the jewelry of injection molding. Now, the new machine MakerBot is talking about here has about 1/2 the layer height of a CupCake, so lets say 8 voxels to each 1 voxel in a CupCake. The resolution is much better -- the output could potentially look as good as what comes from something like a Dimensions BST. But it will still not have smooth surfaces. With well designed and well printed parts, it will be very strong. (Cupcake parts are very strong when done right.) But you are not going to be able to get the same smooth stud-and-tube mating with consistent "clutch power" (as Lego calls it) as does Lego from their sophisticated IM process.
All that said, as long as you set your expectations correctly and design within the machine's capability, you will be able to print supplemental parts, no problem. For Lego, I'd probably go with holes for mounting on Technic axles instead of trying to mate with the studs. I've often thought about printing a Geneva wheel mechanism that would mate with Lego Technic, for instance. That's doable. Or printing Lego train track parts -- the Lego track geometry is extremely limited.
Re:But wait. by dubbreak · 2012-01-13 08:39 · Score: 1

Shapesways is definitely interesting. A mech friend of mine introduced me to it. He created a hdd sled so you can take your hard drive from your old xbox 360 and drop it in the new gen machine (http://www.shapeways.com/model/402108/). It's priced ~$11. Yes, it could probably be produced in mass quantities for $1 each, but that's after a $8K mold. This type of thing is great for long tail type products, but will kill the profitability in doing it traditionally.

--
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
Re:But wait. by retchdog · 2012-01-13 12:26 · Score: 1

yeah, i can't think of a better application of the plastic you just heat-extruded than making cooking utensils. :-/ you know that it doesn't cure, right? it would be exactly the same plastic that you just melted...
abs depending on formulation can hold up to 176F (and i'd bet the 3d printer stock is lower). enjoy ladling your borscht and gazpacho.

--
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
Re:But wait. by Rich0 · 2012-01-14 02:45 · Score: 1

Yup. Don't forget that when you're done you'll end up spending $2 on plastic to make a ladle of poorer quality than one you can buy for $1 at a discount store.
Saying that current 3D printers will replace mass manufacturing is like saying that the laser printer will make the New York Times obsolete. The web might very well make the NYT obsolete, but not because people can print the whole newspaper out. Doing so would probably end up using a $5 ream of paper and $3 worth of ink (without pictures) on an average consumer printer, to replace what would otherwise be a $1 newspaper.

RepRap by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:25 · Score: 0

Isn't this all kind of moot when RepRap will happily work with biodegradable plastic

Re:One step farther away from the Gadget-less Offi by Scutter · 2012-01-13 02:25 · Score: 2

I have enough trouble keeping track of the two-dimensional stuff I print. This is something best left cloud-based.

You could use it to print your own 3D clouds.

--

"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"

Gosh! by ackthpt · 2012-01-13 02:34 · Score: 0

Managed to not tell me anything I'd like to know, availability, how big is it, how much does it cost, what materials and so on. Just hype.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

Re:Gosh! by Simon+Brooke · 2012-01-13 03:03 · Score: 2, Funny

Managed to not tell me anything I'd like to know, availability, how big is it, how much does it cost, what materials and so on. Just hype.
This newly fangled Interweb thing has curious devices called 'links'. These are often represented by words distinctively coloured or otherwise marked. Your computational engine is most likely provided with a small carriage vulgarly known as a 'mouse'. If you trundle this carriage across the surface of your writing desk, a representation of a hand or arrow or similar pointing device is automatically and synchronously moved across your information display. If you manoeuvre your 'mouse' until this pointer appears to hover over the distinctively marked text, and then press down on the depressable are on the front left of the carriage until a light click is heard, a page of information will appear elucidating the point being made.
Just sayin'

--
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Re:Gosh! by thejaq · 2012-01-13 03:26 · Score: 2

It's available (several different models/companies, in kit or prebuilt), they are all on the order of 1 - 1.5 ft^3, cost about $1100, print from corn based PLA, or oil based ABS, and a guy on kick starter just successfully raised close to a million bucks to build a comparable (possibly superior) model for $~500.

These machines are laying the ground work of distributed manufacturing. Get everyone building trinkets in their home will 1) get people used to the idea 2) build lots of expertise leading to better software, a universe of parts, exponential improvement and 3) prepare us for the real magic when we're laser sintering aluminum, steel parts, ceramics, etc. in our homes on a similar device. There's nothing to it except for a $1000 CO2 laser, powered metal, and other parts shared with these plastic machines including the know-how of a few 100k tinkerers mastering the workflow of distributed manufacturing using additive processes while building cheap plastic trinkets.
Re:Gosh! by ColdWetDog · 2012-01-13 03:49 · Score: 1

Right. The general population barely has the technical ability to turn off their cell phone.
You're asking them to make something?

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:Gosh! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 12:34 · Score: 0

Right. Think about how skilled you have to be to turn out a nice print from a darkroom. Now you're supposing that people who barely know how to use a paper cutter will print color photos in their homes?
Re:Gosh! by jeffb+(2.718) · 2012-01-13 12:35 · Score: 1

Except that powdered metal can be used to produce incendiaries and explosives, and so Homeland Security will step right in to save us.
Re:Gosh! by thejaq · 2012-01-21 03:25 · Score: 1

It's a good thing that it would impossible to regulate or control the means of production. One could setup an operation from the Home Depot for a few hundred dollars in half a day or probably build something from parts on hand in an average American home. Fortunately, in the midwest we have an unlimited stream of high quality explosives delivered by pipeline to our homes.. Failing that resource, we have 20kg cylinders at the hardware store down the street. Failing that, most commuters have access to 100kg of liquid explosives, literally everywhere they go! Maybe they could effectively regulate the sale of powdered metal, but it would be impossible to stop people from doing it themselves.

this is amazing... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 02:48 · Score: 0

i personally think the cost is pretty decent when you consider what these things can do.

i do a lot of my own mechanic on cars, motorcycles and the like, and plastic parts are the first things that break, and the most expensive ones to replace ! (think of those little plastic pins that hold your bumper, those things are worth 2 to 3$ a pop at most dealerships ... it would literally cost a dime to make with that machine.

for people that are really hands on, this will pay for itself in no time.

just by looking at there website: http://www.thingiverse.com/newest

the have pretty decent stuff, specialty tools, cookie cutters, shooter glasses, sink stoppers ... lots of stuff !!

Re:this is amazing... by Dr_Barnowl · 2012-01-13 03:18 · Score: 1

Don't copy that... bike part.
Printcrime!
Re:this is amazing... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 04:10 · Score: 0

They can't do anything.
"it would literally cost a dime to make with that machine."
And you know this how? What plastic, what material, how will you store it, how long does it last, are the parts as good, what happens when it fails on the highway (liability anyone?). There's more to this than making a poor representation of a shape with an expensive toy.

Can we get a kiosk? by phrackwulf · 2012-01-13 03:04 · Score: 1

This strikes me as the type of development that is better suited for a Hardware store or retail outlet. Why should I make the individual investment when I can just go to Menards with an AutoCAD or Unigraphics file and say, "print me a plastic part" for $2.99 and I'll stop by when its done? That's why you rent tools from the hardware store instead of buying them and letting a bunch of them just take up space. A million individual 3D printers doesn't really make sense.

--
What would Richard Feynman do, if he were here right now? He'd do some math and he'd follow through!

Re:Can we get a kiosk? by phrackwulf · 2012-01-13 03:13 · Score: 2

And while I'm thinking about it... The hardware store would probably have to post the "no dildos" rule pretty quick. But I think it is still a valid business strategy.

--
What would Richard Feynman do, if he were here right now? He'd do some math and he'd follow through!
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by Naso540 · 2012-01-13 03:16 · Score: 1

I was think this as well - like the key cutting station at all the hardware stores!
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by WillAdams · 2012-01-13 03:35 · Score: 1

I'd be glad to have one nearby --- the nearest ``maker'' type shop is over an hour's drive from me.
Even more interesting would be for the shop to have a 3D scanner which would allow them to scan broken parts, then assemble them on-screen / fill in missing bits and fabricate a replacement on the spot.

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by ColdWetDog · 2012-01-13 03:50 · Score: 1

And while I'm thinking about it... The hardware store would probably have to post the "no dildos" rule pretty quick. But I think it is still a valid business strategy.
And no Steve Jobs dolls, and no naked chick dolls and no Jurassic Park toys and no Happy Meal thingies....
Get my drift?

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by OnceWas · 2012-01-13 10:41 · Score: 1

Why should I make the individual investment when I can just go to Menards with an AutoCAD or Unigraphics file and say, "print me a plastic part" for $2.99 and I'll stop by when its done?
Few people thought they needed home laser printers at first either. And you can bet that there will be a Kinko's model coming around the bend quite quickly.

--
Laugh while you can, monkey-boy.
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 11:09 · Score: 0

Your logic reminds me of this quote:
I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.
There's also no need for cars when public transportation is available, etc.
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by aaronb1138 · 2012-01-13 15:07 · Score: 1

Kinko's. That is to say, once the technology is sufficient, it will show up at Kinko's, shortly followed by engineering firms investing in their own machines, followed by consumerization. I'm referring to photocopying and laser printing of course. Really we're in the middle of this right now. The "good" machines that can prototype large parts at high precision are at specialty shops and larger engineering firms. Give the technology some time to mature, it will make it to consumer hands soon enough. I'd say 3-5 years for better "pro-sumer" models, i.e. something you could make replacement car parts with at reasonable size and cost (~500mm in each direction at .1mm precision) and another 3-5 years after that for stuff at the MakerBot grade to mainstream $300 with form factors of 300mm with .2mm precision.
Also as far as raw supplies go, I would suggest making your own raw spool from cheap abundant ABS. The process would be much cheaper than buying at $40/kg. Salvage ABS from a variety of sources and grind it into little bits (I would imagine a used commercial grade snow cone maker or meat grinder works great). Get a toaster oven and modify it for better precision control or build a low temp kiln (~105 deg C). Build a press to extrude it and pour cooling water over the surface as it comes out of a nozzle or die and roll your own. Compared to the price of the MakerBot and supplies, producing your own ABS even with the trial and error involved is much more cost effective.
I would also suspect Chinese suppliers of ABS spools will start to show up on eBay soon enough at 1/10-1/5 the cost of MakerBot soon enough.
Re:Can we get a kiosk? by aaronb1138 · 2012-01-13 15:21 · Score: 1

Oh and as a reply to my own comments, you can get all the ABS you want on a Saturday hanging around a charity run recycling center (not a commercial one obviously). 50-100 kgs should be no problem to haul in for 8 hours of volunteering on the weekend.
Lots more if you get a similar machine that can work with LDPE / HDPE (milk jugs, soda bottles, etc.).
Hopefully the next generation machines will have an integrated hopper that grinds and melts down the refuse for recycling. Like Mr. Fusion.

Self-compile? by proverbialcow · 2012-01-13 03:14 · Score: 1

For me, the technology will be sufficiently advanced when I can use a Makerbot to print the pieces necessary to build a Makerbot.

--
The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion

Re:Self-compile? by phooky · 2012-01-13 03:38 · Score: 2

It's been done.
Re:Self-compile? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 05:21 · Score: 1

Well, minus the belts, the electronics. the motors, the bearings, the rails, the print head, the fuseor the... Ok; it was able to build the plastic frame, which is still awesome, but still leagues away from actually making the peices required to build itself.
For that you would need a printer that:
Can use multiple materials with different properties :
Ridged and conductive
ridged and non-conductive
flexible and elastic
Extremely ridged and strong
FPGAs
It would then either need motors/stepper motors as one of it's consumables or be able to wind a motor on the fly (in which case it must be able to 'print' permanent magnets)
At that point it could print itself, but it would be 'some assembly required'; the final product would be in pieces that would likely snap together quite cleanly and complete the project. For a true von neumann device it must be able to print a fully functional copy of itself; which would require it to have a printing area larger then it is, or have some external arm to complete the final assembly.
This is not to disparage the accomplishments that the DIY guys have done so far, but to dismissively tell a guy who says 'before I can adopt it it needs to be able to print something at least as advanced as it is' by saying 'it's been done' and linking him to just the frame components having been printed is not constructive. You could point out that that date is a long way away; and that the poster is being a wet blanket on all the cool things being done right now, or you could mention that once that happens 3d printing will be 'done' (in that there will be no need to make them more advanced, just bigger and more accurate and using more esoteric materials); or that that is a complete other ballgame because it represents the start of a technological singularity.
Re:Self-compile? by proverbialcow · 2012-01-14 12:08 · Score: 1

I wasn't trying to dampen the mood (much); it just seems to me that every incremental improvement in the technology gets a news post, while for it to be actually useful, it needs to do more than print Legos. I'm saying "Let me know when it can print Mindstorms."

--
The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion

another no transcript video report by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 03:49 · Score: 0

how many slashdot users have access to speakers/head phones in their place of work ?

please add transcripts for these video reports, or even better add subtitles.

Re:another no transcript video report by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 05:41 · Score: 0

Want text, not video.
Maybe it's my age, but when I click on a link to get some information, I'd prefer text. I can copy, search, skim, and speed-read text. I honestly don't see the value of a video of some head talking to me when I can read for myself.

Saw it... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 04:24 · Score: 0

I got a whopping 2 minutes before I got split up from friends that didn't care... The resolution was quite good. Better than I expected.
Now I'm considering getting one to print droid parts. Not sure if I can save $1700 to make it pay for itself on one project, though!

Embedded Video by Catskul · 2012-01-13 04:29 · Score: 1, Insightful

The front page story style gave no hint that the video was to embedded and that users need to click through to see the video. I checked all three links assuming one of them would link to the video and figured that the posting editor had accidentally omitted it. It was only when I clicked through to see if anyone else was as confused as I was that I saw it was an embedded video.

The front page style should be changed to allow viewing embedded video from the front page, or at the very least the fact that there is an embedded video to be clicked through should be overtly indicated.

--

Im not here now... Im out KILLING pepperoni

Re:Embedded Video by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 11:53 · Score: 0

Slashdot has always had mystery links in the story. You often have to hover over all of them to figure out which one the title is referring to. Today it was just one level more confusing.

This is not news by s4ndm4n · 2012-01-13 04:38 · Score: 1

I know I saw a news story about this at least a year ago -- thing-o-matic's 3d printer is definitely not a new thing.. Even the idea of it being an affordable option for prototyping has already been in articles for at least a year.

it's a lie by Lazy+Jones · 2012-01-13 04:47 · Score: 1

it only prints the mechanical parts and none of the electronic parts needed to make a makerbot work ...

--
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)

Would have liked to see the printer more by JonnyDK · 2012-01-13 05:00 · Score: 1

It would have been nice to see a close up of the actual printer in the video instead of some guy in the foreground with the printer way in the background!

Steve Jobs action figure... by tomhath · 2012-01-13 06:03 · Score: 1

...is now just a scan away. Anybody have the markup for that?

Not very smart by SuperKendall · 2012-01-13 06:33 · Score: 2

Ladle broke? Make a new one.

Holy crap I hope no-one reads your post and tries this. Do you have any idea how much effort goes into material creation that is safe for you to put in a hot pot of soup without leeching all sorts of things into the broth?

Same goes for a spatula, I would be really hesitant to put a generic extrusion material on a hot griddle at all much less near a pancake...

Also a spatula needs to be flexible and have really different elasticity than a ladle.

Now I'm sure over time some of these issues will be addressed, but honestly the whole material aspect for something as simple as utensils that can be used for food is really complex and I am not sure a home 3D printer would ever have that degree of complexity in materials it could generate.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Not very smart by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 07:11 · Score: 0

NNOOOOoooooooooOOOoooo!!!!! Reality, physics, chemistry, logic and materials science in *MY* 3D printer story!??? Who will suck Bre Pettis off now!?
Re:Not very smart by Onymous+Coward · 2012-01-13 11:16 · Score: 1

GP was not an actual advocate.
Re:Not very smart by aaronb1138 · 2012-01-13 15:39 · Score: 1

True, but you create a mold (mould?) with the MakerBot or equivalent then cast in something like silicon or another proper food safe plastic?
Like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M400dj19nUs
Re:Not very smart by Rich0 · 2012-01-14 02:51 · Score: 1

Perhaps, if you want to spend a week trying to create a manufacturing process for ladles that can be sold at a profit for $1 by those who have already figured it out. How much is it going to cost you in materials alone per unit when you're done? You'll end up spending more, polluting more, and wasting a ton of time.
3d printers are great for modeling new things before manufacturing them, but it is going to be a rare case indeed where they're actually a useful manufacturing technology.

Cubify by TheSync · 2012-01-13 06:41 · Score: 4, Informative

The big story at CES is the debut of Cubify, a $1299 MSRP 3D printer that uses technology similar to the Makerbot, but it is a bit more professionally assembled. It will launch with accepting a USB drive with STL files on it, and may later have WiFi with an open API.

Re:Replicator (TM)? by vik · 2012-01-13 07:34 · Score: 1

Fortunately, you can print a self-replicator with it.

So print one without DRM by vik · 2012-01-13 07:36 · Score: 1

The nice thing about 3D printing technology is that you can now build 3D printers with it. See reprap.org

Would you settle for assistance? by vik · 2012-01-13 07:38 · Score: 1

While it might not make these things, it can make the jigs or tools to do so if you really want to. My guess is you don't really want to that much :) However, in some parts of the world people will.

Bowmar Brain by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-13 08:09 · Score: 0

Remember the Bowmar Brain ?
Maker bot will be very very lucky not to get totally blown out of hte water in a few years when Canon and HP introduce 500$ personal printers
And their site is almost comically un imformative; one the most important things - the software - is not described
Thats like talking about this really cool printer, but not telling people about software that turns screen displays into print; I mean.....

Poor patternmakers... by NonFerrousBueller · 2012-01-13 08:41 · Score: 1

I reckon the group most affected by this will be patternmakers. This is already a dying art, now designers can print a pattern directly from their desktop, with shrinkage rates and draft calculated by software. I've worked a bit in a foundry - our guys were more mouldmakers than patternmakers, and the amount of work it takes to make a mould that allows a clean finished part is phenomenal. This technology could take most of their work away - except for the most tedious final polishing.

We are still a long way away from people making bootleg Fisher-Price at home, but I'm sure that day will come. Hopefully the manufacturing industry can cope with it better than the media companies have with their product!

Also, see http://bathsheba.com/

Re:Other Materials by DanielRavenNest · 2012-01-13 09:37 · Score: 1

There is already perfectly good technology for making items out of other materials, like CNC machines. If you couple that with a scrap furnace to remelt all the shavings you get cutting metal, there is very little waste. With wood, toss the shavings back into the forest and it eventually becomes more wood. Concrete can be formed additively, it's called "slip forming" and is used all the time for making things like highway pavement. Some people are working on general purpose 3-D concrete formers that work on the same principles as a makerbot, just bigger.

What I see in the long run is a combined CNC machine that shares one set of multi-axis motors, with different heads to do different materials: plastic extrusion, machining metal, etc, or if that is too difficult, several single purpose machines that are connected to a parts conveyor and an assembly robot. That starts to get beyond what a home garage might handle, but it would be the right scale for a copy shop that currently has several big photocopy machines.

... and may later be open... by dbc · 2012-01-13 09:45 · Score: 1

as opposed to the the fully open hardware, open software 3D printers that have been out for years. And they aren't shipping. Sorry, not for me.

Recursively by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-15 23:16 · Score: 0

Does it print 3D printers that can print 3D printers that can print 3D printers?

Slashdot Mirror

Geek Tool: Slashdot Video of Award Winning 3D Printer From CES

137 comments