Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Turbo Entabulator: A 3D-printed Mechanical Computer

Posted by samzenpus on from the because-you-can dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Have you ever been sitting there, quietly computing something and thinking to yourself, 'If only this process were somehow billions of times slower, less reliable, and involved lots of physical labor?' If so, the Turbo Entabulator is the machine you've been looking for! It's a (nearly-entirely) 3D-printed mechanical computer. With three single-digit counters for memory, it's driven by a hand-cranked, Jacquard-style punch card reader. You can even download the files and build your own."

58 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Oh sure, but... by millia · · Score: 5, Funny

    it's not a turbo-encabulator.I've been wanting one of those for a long time.

    --
    stored on computers from birth to the grave
    1. Re:Oh sure, but... by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

      I'm waiting for the print-it-yourself turbo Interociter!
      It will put all non-turbo interociters to shame...

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    2. Re:Oh sure, but... by millia · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I don't know how else you control side-fumbling.

      --
      stored on computers from birth to the grave
    3. Re:Oh sure, but... by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, me too. I need one to fix my chronosynclastic infandibulator; the space-time interociter I got from Tom Servo is totally shot and every time I try to send a .jpg of the turbo subsystem in to metalunan support it just shows black fog. Cheap Gizmonic crap!

    4. Re:Oh sure, but... by sanman2 · · Score: 1

      Dammit, I was hoping that somebody could print a simple Babbage machine

  2. Yes. by QilessQi · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Have you ever been sitting there, quietly computing something and thinking to yourself, 'If only this process were somehow billions of times slower, less reliable, and involved lots of physical labor?'"

    Yes. And then I switch to a Windows box. Mission accomplished.

    --
    Koans and fables for the software engineer
    1. Re:Yes. by Mitchell314 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Every programmer at some point in their life wonders if they can make a computer out of a given thing in front of them.

      Which given how many times computers and cpus have been made in minecraft and dwarf fortress, explains a lot.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    2. Re:Yes. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      And by those standards, this project is even less impressive. I don't know if the creators of MineCraft ever intended for people to be able to create computers inside the game, but my guess would be no. A 3D printer on the other hand is designed to make custom mechanical parts. Building a mechanical computer using a 3D printer doesn't really required much of a leap from one step to the next. Take an existing design, and print out the parts. However, in a game like MineCraft, It would be quite a feat even figuring out what had to be done based on the limited number of blocks available, and you really couldn't even be sure it was possible until after you completed the design.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it tells you that neckbeards are trapped in 1997.

    4. Re:Yes. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

      "Have you ever been sitting there, quietly computing something and thinking to yourself, 'If only this process were somehow billions of times slower, less reliable, and involved lots of physical labor?'"

      No. I swore off on Perl years ago.

    5. Re:Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... whilst playing in HardCore mode. Damn creepers keep exploding in the middle of the Level 2 cache! Half logic, half monster trap...

    6. Re:Yes. by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Old times... Windows had upgrades that actualy improved it by then.

      --
      Rethinking email
    7. Re:Yes. by QilessQi · · Score: 1

      Oh, relax. I was going for the +1 Funny, and Windows is an easy punchline on Slashdot. :-)

      --
      Koans and fables for the software engineer
    8. Re:Yes. by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      No problem, I got your joke.

      I just can't see a troll like that AC starve :) It hurts my feelings!

      --
      Rethinking email
  3. Good for teaching ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Informative

    So nobody is likely to use this for actual work, but as a teaching aid, it definitely goes a long way. Explaining with a working physical device the principles of basic computing and Turing machine type things is pretty cool

    And, if someone has done this, it's only a matter of time before we start getting some super awesome 3d printed Rube Goldberg type or Steampunk-type of devices.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Good for teaching ... by plover · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was amused that he built it because his 3D printed Jacquard Loom was even less reliable.

      3D plastic extrusion printing is fine for printing a pencil cup or a replacement game token, but a precision manufacturing process it is not. There's a reason machined parts have tight tolerances: without them, moving parts bind, jam, and break.

      --
      John
    2. Re:Good for teaching ... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The same can be said for any number of things. There is something to actually being able to see and touch something and being able to figure out how it works. This is why I spent the weekend with my 4 year old building a working automatic transmission with planetary and ring gears out of Legos. He became curious about how one worked after seeing a book about Lego machines at the library and made the connection between Lego gears shown in it and gears in a vehicle transmission. So he wanted me to build him one and show him how it works. Granted it doesn't have clutch packs (components are locked using shafts), torque converter, or a valve body (you move the shafts to lock components manually), but it does show how the gearing works. It has 3 forward speeds, neutral, park, and reverse, just like old standard 3 speed automatics did.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    3. Re:Good for teaching ... by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      As the proud owner of a 3D printer whose parts I am slowly replacing with homemade ones (as a way to learn, mostly) I have to disagree. 3D printed parts do end up being a bit melty, but the difference between printing a gear and sanding it to tolerance, and carving one from scratch is huge.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    4. Re:Good for teaching ... by dj245 · · Score: 1

      As the proud owner of a 3D printer whose parts I am slowly replacing with homemade ones (as a way to learn, mostly) I have to disagree. 3D printed parts do end up being a bit melty, but the difference between printing a gear and sanding it to tolerance, and carving one from scratch is huge.

      I honestly can't figure out why you would do that when you could laser-cut, water-jet cut, or CNC* some wood or steel and be done in 1 step. If you're going to all the trouble of having an electronically-positioned tool, why not just hook it up to an electric motor and buy some milling cutters? Water-jet and laser cutting is outside the realm of most hobbyists, but homemade CNC machines are probably simpler than a 3d printer. You don't have to worry about adhesion, bead size, etc. I guess if you have a hammer everything looks like a nail.

      *technically you should cut gears on a hobbing machine, but for hobbyist purposes a CNC should be fine.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    5. Re:Good for teaching ... by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      For fun. I already have a CNC mill and I can easily borrow a laser cutter if I need to. I also understand that most people don't and want to come up with stuff for them.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    6. Re:Good for teaching ... by plover · · Score: 1

      [ Disclaimer: I spent several years working in a precision grinding shop, grinding machined parts to very tight tolerances, measuring them with carefully calibrated tools, and achieving accuracy that lathes simply are not capable of achieving. So what I consider acceptable accuracy and what you consider accurate will likely vary more than slightly. ]

      A 3D extrusion printer is not exactly a precision tool. There is a limit to the precision of the parts it can print. That's neither good nor bad, it's simply a fact of the design of the machine and the tolerance of the parts that it was built from, as well as the plastic extrusion process itself.

      I fully understand that you can build a device with 3D printed parts, and it will function. But those parts are not precise, and devices built that rely on them will not operate with precision or accuracy. For most of the parts you're likely printing, that's not a requirement. For example, the parts that join rods together on a RepRap don't have to be accurate or precise, they just need to grip the rods securely. The person doing the assembly will align the rods accurately.

      However, there are components in the movement chain where precision is important. If the 3D printed gear feeding plastic into the extrusion nozzle is not perfectly round, it can cause minute alterations to the feed speed of the filament, producing small differences in the thickness of the extruded plastic as a result. Building layer upon layer of the output will probably average out the differences rendering them invisible for most projects, but if you were to print a square wall with a perimeter that was a multiple of the pitch circumference of the extruder gear, you might get a wavy or bumpy wall as a result.

      As more imprecise parts are added to the chain of parts controlling the motion of the printer, they will have an additive effect they on the accuracy of the printed results. I'm not saying you have a bad or crappy machine. Whether or not the printer is producing parts that meet your tolerance needs is up to you. Geckos, figurines, and weighted companion cubes don't have to be precise.

      And yes, you can print an oversized part and grind it down to meet a tight tolerance, but that's not the result of a precision printer, that's the result of the process of a careful craftsman.

      --
      John
  4. people asking why bother by Guano_Jim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard.

    Hats off to the designer.

    --
    3D Printing Tips and Tricks at Zheng3.com
    1. Re:people asking why bother by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      But this doesn't really seem particularly hard, just time consuming. People build mechanical computers all the time. Using a 3D printer to make the parts is a very obvious way of doing it. While I respect the person who built it just to further their own learning and to have a little fun, I would have to say that it doesn't really impress me, and isn't really that newsworthy.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:people asking why bother by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can save some confusion and annoyance by just accepting that "on a 3D printer" is the latest "everything old is new again", just like "in the cloud", "on a handheld", "on the internet" and "on a computer" each were in turn. For each new engineering platform all the obvious stuff will be done for the first time on that platform, usually with some fairly minor cleverness involved. Easier just to accept the cycle of faux-new than to try to fight it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:people asking why bother by sensei+moreh · · Score: 1

      Kind of like writing HelloWorld! in umpeen different programming languages

      --
      Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
  5. Quickly! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fetch my sturdiest manservant and the overclocking whip!

    1. Re:Quickly! by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes sir, Mr. Burns. That would be Homer Simpson, sir.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:Quickly! by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Who?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    3. Re:Quickly! by digitrev · · Score: 1

      One of your slobs in Sector 7G.

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    4. Re:Quickly! by gooman · · Score: 2

      "One of the mouth-breathers from Sector 7-G"

      --
      "Kittens give Morbo gas!"
  6. I guess it fails Turing even if prog'd correcly. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can you please not imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  7. Another step by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

    ..towards the singularity.

  8. Terrorism! Murka! 9/11! by EmagGeek · · Score: 3, Funny

    We have to put a stop to this dangerous movement of self-creation and innovation that is not under the protective regulation of government. We need common sense laws immediately that require all 3D printers to be registered, and licensure for their operators.

    We cannot allow this threat to our national security to continue.

    This Public Service Announcement brought to you by the Republican-Democrat Partnership Conference in association with The Foundation for Peace through Unity and Faith in Government.

  9. Well I can deduce. by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    1) No kids.. Dad has way too much time on his hands.
    2) Wife is a Librarian and makes a good clamp when needed.
    3) was bored one day and decided to make something with that $3000 printer the wife got him at XMAS.

    This is cool but man are we going to be inundated with every novelty item that is 3d printed now? This is neat but the Lego Turing machine was IMO cooler

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Well I can deduce. by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Dammit now there is something else I will have to build out of Legos if my oldest son ever see it. I can't see the video (blocked at work) but if it something like the Babbage's Analytical Engine I fear for my life.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    2. Re:Well I can deduce. by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Worse yet, you'll need mindstorms

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  10. Maybe this was what Linus was talking about by intermodal · · Score: 2

    when referring to the new kernel release which will involve more profanity use.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  11. Re:I guess it fails Turing even if prog'd correcly by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Too late...

  12. it's 3D printers all the way down by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    steam powered ^W^W via radio waves ^W^W^W with a computer ^W^W^W on the internet ^W^W^W 3D printed

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  13. Does it use unilateral phase detractors? by Alejux · · Score: 1

    to automatically synchronize the cardinal grammeters?

  14. Jacquard loom by bhlowe · · Score: 1

    Hey, semi-related.. If you type Jacquard loom into the search bar on audible.com (through 6/12) you can get a free copy of Jullian Assange Cypherpunks book.

  15. Re:Now make a water powered computer by Mikkeles · · Score: 2

    Do a web search for fluidics.

    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
  16. Mechanical calculators by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 4, Informative
    I have one from around 1958, and it's quite satisfying to use.

    They can multiply and divide as well as adding/subtracting. The above link shows the result of doing 355/113: 3.1415929 with a remainder of 23.

    The top left is an accumulator, the top right is a counter, and the lower register is the number you want to add/subtract (entry register). So to do 355/113, the procedure is

    1. Pull all three 3 metal tabs on the sides to clear all registers
    2. Enter 355, press the rightmost red arrow button to shoot the entry register number all the way to the left
    3. Crank forward once. You now have 3550000000000 in the accumulator and "1" in the counter's leftmost position.
    4. Squeeze the two rightmost chrome handles together to clear both the counter and entry register back to 0
    5. Enter 113, press the rightmost red arrow button to shoot the number all the way to the left. You're done entering numbers at this point.
    6. Crank backwards to subtract from the accumulator until it is less than the entry register (takes three times). Don't worry if you overshoot; a bell will ring to indicate underflow and you just add it back. The counter now shows three in the leftmost position. The red dot indicates that it notes you started off subtracting, so it's counting backward cranks as +1 instead of -1.
    7. Press the right arrow to shift the entry register one position to the right
    8. Repeat the subtracting process, shifting right until you can't go any more right. You're done.

    It sounds more complicated than it is, but really it's just long division. It takes about 20-30 seconds to do that division. That sucker works as well as the day it was built. I've looked inside; it's a mechanical marvel.

    Oh yeah, those white slider tabs are for placing the decimal points where you want them

    1. Re:Mechanical calculators by lgw · · Score: 1

      That's awesome. How much mechanical force is needed? I'd worry about catching my wrist on the right-hand tabs while cranking, unless the crank was surprisingly easy to turn.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Mechanical calculators by tippe · · Score: 1

      I've always wanted a Curta mechanical calculator conceived before WWII by an Austrian (but only mass-produced afterwards, I believe). It does more or less the same thing as the monstrosity that you linked to above (including multiplication and division), all in a hand-sized package. Now that's a mechanical marvel. I'd love to have one...

    3. Re:Mechanical calculators by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      So you're essentially drooling for a slide rule. They can be had on e-bay for various prices.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    4. Re:Mechanical calculators by tippe · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I suppose it's more or less like a slide rule. Kind of like how a Rolex is essentially the same as a sundial (plus or minus several hundred precisely machined moving parts, assembled with amazing workmanship).

    5. Re:Mechanical calculators by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 1

      Very little force is needed, and I've never gotten caught on those tabs. Actually, the force depends on how many numbers have to change: rolling over something like 999999 to 1000000 makes a noticeable difference in resistance. Really I should open it up and lube it.

      I'm told you can still find these in remote villages in India and Africa and the like. They don't need electricity and are very reliable.

    6. Re:Mechanical calculators by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 1

      Slide rules give approximate answers. VERY approximate answers; their only advantage back in the day was that they were fast. These mechanical marvels give exact answers. Considering that when you divide it gives you a remainder that you can use to extend the answer to any arbitrary number of decimal places, they are in fact more accurate than a modern electronic calculator (apart from fancy ones like hp50g)

      Anyway, why the negativity? Do you not appreciate well built complex machinery? My example was a Facit calculator, made in Sweden and extremely popular around the world. A similar marvel was the M209 cipher machine. Even includes a printer, yet it fits in your pocket. I'd love to have one.

  17. Re:Now make a water powered computer by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
    If you will pay for it, I will be happy to build you a fluidic computer that uses water as its computational medium and executes the PDP8s instruction set (PDP8E if you cna afford it). I think a clock speed of 50-100 Hz is probably feasible for a Mk1, and, with considerably greater funds, several kHz might be possible eventually. (1 MHz is not impossible, theoretically - faster than a real PDP8s, but it is definitely beyond my skill level).

    I can make it steam powered for about double the cost.

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  18. Would be useful in Revolution the TV show.. by Danathar · · Score: 1

    No electricity! (yes, the plot is insane) but this device would fit right into that world.

  19. Turbo... by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    ... cool. This upgrade is a long time coming. They base version was hell at rendering.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  20. So... by Progman3K · · Score: 1

    Can 3D printers print 3D printers yet?

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    1. Re:So... by ajlitt · · Score: 1

      Sort of.

  21. Re:I guess it fails Turing even if prog'd correcly by loufoque · · Score: 1

    It doesn't appear to have memory, just 3 registers.

  22. I have in my posession by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    The drawing for a four bit adder. I also have the components but need to assemble the circuit boards, etc. Be fun to have a computer where you can follow the action again.

  23. Solve two problems at once! by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

    We will make the IRS and the NSA use these exclusively.

    Here, have all our data. Let us know if you finish a search before the heat death of the universe.

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  24. Self-reproducing by Ronin441 · · Score: 1

    The RepRap project is an initiative to develop a 3D printer that can print most of its own components.

    Until now, RepRap have been stymied by an inability to print any of the systems that control the printer. But, no longer! Simply print a mechanical computer to drive your 3D printer, and the goal of a self-reproducing device will be fulfilled!

    Might be large, though.