Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What's Holding Back 3-D Printing

Posted by Soulskill on from the my-3-D-glasses-don't-seem-to-help dept.

An anonymous reader writes "An article at MIT's Technology Review makes the case that the complexity of the design tools behind 3-D printing are what's holding it back from widespread adoption. Many of the devices are indeed prohibitively expensive, but the inability for your average person — or even your average tech hobbyist — to pick it up and start experimenting is an even bigger obstacle. 'That means software innovation could be more important to 3-D printing than gradual improvements in the underlying technology for shaping objects. That technology is already 30 years old and is widely used in industry to create prototypes, molds, and, in some cases, parts for airplanes. ... Although additive manufacturing allows for designs that can't be made easily in any other way — such as complex shapes with internal cavities — so far, companies have mostly used 3-D printing to create prototypes or models of familiar products.'"

18 of 348 comments (clear)

  1. Not enough publicity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tech sites like Slashdot are ignoring innovations like 3D printing, bitcoin, Raspberry Pi.

    1. Re:Not enough publicity by sanman2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What rubbish - with everyone and his brother being a programmer nowadays, anything new always ends up with a call to develop more software for it. When all you have is a hammer, then every problem is made to look like a nail. Software is most certainly not the bottleneck. There are plenty of 3D modeling programs out there, and a number of them have features for solid modeling.

      The real hurdle to 3D printing is in being able to produce parts that don't look like rejects from the Lego factory. High-end 3D printers that can produce high-quality objects command an astronomical price. Software is the least of the problem here.

    2. Re:Not enough publicity by rudy_wayne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What rubbish - with everyone and his brother being a programmer nowadays, anything new always ends up with a call to develop more software for it. When all you have is a hammer, then every problem is made to look like a nail. Software is most certainly not the bottleneck. There are plenty of 3D modeling programs out there,

      Although I agree that 3D printers that can do something really useful are still too expensive, dismissing software is just plain wrong. If you think that software isn't a big part of the problem, then you've never used 3D modeling software.

      The idea that anyone can design a 3D item as easily as drawing a picture in Microsoft Paint (or GIMP) is a fantasy that may never become a reality. If you've ever actually used 3D modelling software, you understand this.

    3. Re:Not enough publicity by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The real hurdle to 3D printing is in being able to produce parts that don't look like rejects from the Lego factory.

      The real issue is that most people just don't need custom parts. Most widgets that are useful are already available at a very good price at the local hardware store.

      Custom part fabrication is handy for well-heeled tinkerers, but most people aren't tinkerers or well-heeled.

      Come out with a 3D food printer, on the other hand, that will probably sell. ;)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:Not enough publicity by daid303 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Stop looking at the bad reprap prints, and look at this:
      http://davedurant.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/ultimaker-faq-but-what-about-the-quality-of-prints/

      All done on stock 1200 euro Ultimakers.

    5. Re:Not enough publicity by marcansoft · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's two problems with the current crop of 3D printers. First, the printers are fiddly. It is possible to print out decent objects on a good printer (personally, I'm a fan of the Ultimaker). However, it requires tuning the printer and the software and maintaining them. It's a solution for tinkerers, not for Joe Average. Companies like MakerBot are deluding themselves when they think they've got a RepRap-class printer they can sell already assembled "for the masses". They still need too much maintenance.

      Second, you can't just print anything and expect it to look good. If your object doesn't require support material (overhangs are all under a reasonable angle), and the slices don't contain more than one connected surface, then it will look beautiful on a decent printer. If you need support material though, then you have to deal with removing it, which is nontrivial. If you have more than one surface per slice, then you have to deal with stringing. That's not too bad if the surfaces are far apart (you can remove it easily), but it's difficult if they are close together. These are the limitations of plastic extrusion printers today, and you need to design models taking them into account.

      On decent prints: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcan42/8542507791/in/photostream/ . That's a gear, about 8cm across. You have to get up really close to be able to see those layers with the naked eye (they're 0.1mm tall). The roughness on the top and bottom surfaces is probably on the order of 50 microns. It is possible to go smaller on this printer.
      On fiddling: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcan42/8543920590/in/photostream/ . Left print is before tensioning belts, right print after. Of course, one of the cool aspects is that I was able to print the belt tensioners on the printer itself.

      I'm very happy with my printer, but I would never recommend it to someone who isn't already a hardware hacker.

  2. For me... It's the cost of good printers by Karmashock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't really want a reprap or similar printer. The print quality is too low. And the cost of the high end machines is prohibitive.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:For me... It's the cost of good printers by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't really want a reprap or similar printer. The print quality is too low.

      The quality is improving. If you haven't checked out a 3D printer in the last year, you might be surprised. But I think TFA is wrong. The design tools are not what is holding back 3D printing. My son is in third grade, and he used a CAD program to design some parts for his science project. My daughter has designed and printed furniture for her dollhouse. It is not hard.

      What is keeping 3D printing from being more of a hobbyist niche, is that most people just don't have any compelling need for random plastic parts. So far there is no killer app.

    2. Re:For me... It's the cost of good printers by BryanL · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought printable guns were going to be the killer app.

  3. What's holding back 3-D printing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What's holding back 3-D printing is that it's only good for making plastic crap.

    Doing something useful, like replicating a new carburetor for my 30-year-old roto-tiller, is more difficult and more expensive.

  4. Nonsense by arpad1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What's holding back 3-D printing is that there's hardly anything worthwhile to be done with it.

    Other then printing an AR-15 lower receiver or magazines what can you do with a 3-D printer that's worth the bother?

    --
    Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    1. Re:Nonsense by evil_aaronm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I hesitate to say, "You lack imagination." It's too confrontational for my tastes. However, if I had a quality 3D printer, capable of turning out durable pieces, I'd have almost no end of things I'd create: parts for robotics; automated pan-tilt assemblies; custom gears; custom servo horns; project cases for gadgets I've built; toys for my granddaughter; etc. As it is, I cut and drill pieces from stock plastic, and it's a pain in comparison to custom forming things from a CAD drawing.

  5. Cost of the raw materials by robbak · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As long as the raw materials are priced in tens of dollars per kilogram, printing out random stuff is always going to be too expensive. Really, it is bulk plastic. It should be priced nearer 40 kilograms per dollar than 40 dollars per kilogram.

    --
    Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
  6. use minecraft by jcupitt65 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A friend of a friend made this:

    http://www.printcraft.org/

    Make something in minecraft on this (free) server and it emails you a 3D printer file of your object when you disconnect.

  7. Acquisition of Skills Takes Time - lots of it by BoRegardless · · Score: 4, Informative

    Been using 3D solids for rapid prototyping new medical equipment for over 15 years.

    Job shops can make your parts quickly and relatively inexpensively compared to other machining and hand working methods, so that part is OK for prototyping and functional parts that can stand being done in the limited rapid prototyping materials & processes available.

    Skills need are the understanding of the design of physical parts with all the subtleties and the desire to learn to use a competant 3D solids modeling environment. You don't walk in to this expecting a familiarity with PowerPoint as enough skill to do the job.

    Competent 3D solids software from the likes of SolidWorks, AutoCAD or other similar programs start at about $5,000 per seat and they don't become highly usable until you get near $10k. It easily takes 1000-2000 hours to become good at doing 3D modeling, assuming you are already familiar with design and 2D CAD.

    There are 3D solids RP machines in half a dozen types and you can't afford to buy them for hobby uses. Stratysis laser sintering for Nylon, SS & Titanium type things cost more than a Ferrari, so forget it, unless you are Jay Leno.

  8. Seems pretty spot on to me by ethicalcannibal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is the exact reason I haven't picked one up. I can make and use a vacuum former. I can sculpt, and make castings. All of these things are easier for me than working with the current set of 3D printers. I'm sure I could learn to work the thing, and make the programs, but it's just not worth my time, when I can do it the old fashioned way faster. Not everyone is a programmer. If the interface was slick and easy, I'd cough up the cash in minutes. I've been watching the progression of these little things for ages, and would love to have one. However, even my most tech savvy buddies have to spend more time trouble shooting than making. Hell, even the Mojang guys were tweeting about a new 3D printer, and damn if they didn't have to trouble shoot, and replace a part straight off. So the article is right. It's not the $2000 that is holding me back from buying one. It's the learning curve, and the inhospitable user interface. I may be a techy artist, but I'm an artist, not a programmer.

  9. I've been designing/building a 3D printer for by mark_reh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    almost a year now, on and off. Here are my comments...

    Trying to use Arduino Mega2560 controller board with RAMPS 1.4 and LCD/encoder/SD card reader and Marlin firmware has been a nightmare of surfing through thousands of posts on dozens of internet forums to try to get info on how to get the compiler to run, what needs to be modified in the firmware for my machine- no documentation but the often cryptic comments in the source code.

    The latest, greatest firmware, Marlin, was developed using an old version of the Arduino-0023 IDE and cannot be compiled on the latest Arduino IDE. The old IDE attempts to define the "round" math function that is already defined in the AVR-GCC compiler, so it will not run unless you comment out the "round" function definition in the old Arduino-0023 IDE.

    Next, you have to modify the firmware to fit your machine- it needs to know things like steps/mm in each axis, how big is the print bed, etc. How do you know what needs to be changed? Read through the poor comments in the source code because there is no other documentation, or start hunting through forums. Just figuring out the logic for the endstops is a game of trial and error even though proper comments or better yet, a manual of some sort telling what the defaults are/mean and how to change them, would be a huge help.

    Once you get he machine running, there are about 50 variables in the firmware that can be used to tune its performance, if you can figure out what they are and how they affect the print results.

    Open source is a nice idea, but I'll take thoroughly documented, reliable PIC hardware and IDE over an Arduino any day of the week, but I'm getting off topic...

    Using a printer is a whole different set of problems. Unless you just want to print other people's designs, you need to create a 3D model, requiring knowledge of CAD software. Once you have the model, you have to slice it up using yet another piece of software and requiring knowledge of intimate details of the printer's mechanical, electrical, and thermal characteristics to get maximum quality results.

    I used to use PCB milling machines in the 90s and processing the files for cutting a board was a major PITA back then. Here we are 15 years later and the software situation hasn't improved. Until someone integrates the model creation, slicing, and printer control software into a single package and makes it easy for almost anyone to use without a lot of special knowledge or training, 3D printing will remain a hobby for hard-core geeks.

  10. Maybe... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe the problem is that 3D printing is mainly for prototyping products. How many consumers are going to do that? Probably very few, particularly at today's price points. Hobbyists may, but even then, it is often cheaper, faster and better quality to send the design off to a specialty house than purchase the equipment yourself, unless the hobbyist is going to be doing a lot of work.

    In short 3D printing isn't taking off in the consumer market for the same reason that CNC machines aren't. There really isn't a consumer need.