Affordable 3D Metal Printer Developed Based on RepRap

hypnosec writes "Researchers have developed and open-sourced a low-cost 3D metal printer capable of printing metal tools and objects that can be build for under £1,000. A team of researchers led by Associate Professor Joshua Pearce at the Michigan Technological University developed the firmware and the plans for the printer and have made it available freely. The open source 3D printer is definitely a huge leap forward as the starting price of commercial counterparts is around £300,000. Pearce claimed that their technology will not only allow smaller companies and start-ups to build inexpensive prototypes, but it will allow other scientists and researchers to build tools and objects required for their research without having to shell out thousands, and could be used to print parts for machines such as windmills." It's a modified RepRap; looks like we're getting closer to the RepRap being able to print all of its parts.

Comments

Piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't download a car........?

Re:Piracy

[davester666]

but you would print one yourself!

Re:Piracy

[serviscope_minor]

You wouldn't download a car........?

You wouldn't steal a baby.

Re:Piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

The real question is, would you drive in a car that you downloaded, printed and assembled yourself? I sure as hell wouldn't with the current generation of this tech, and probably not the next few either.

Yes, yes, I know this is still early days proof of concept blah blah no need to lecture me on the value of experimentation in the nascent phases of technological developments.

Re:Piracy

[rmdingler]

+1 Crafty. There will be a 'tell' when this technology is truly viable. It will probably begin in a Congressional Committee for Oversight...

Re:Piracy

[GameboyRMH]

Fuck yes I would!

And next year I will be uploading some car parts. Stay tuned for my 4AGE 16v ITB adapter and crank ladder bars.

Re:Piracy

[Joce640k]

Has anybody said "guns" yet?

Re:Piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

Call me back when we can 3D print copies of babies.

Re: Piracy

[IrquiM]

Guns are for stupid prille.

Re:Piracy

[stub667]

You wouldn't steal a baby.

If the genes have been patented, I'm sure there are lots of stolen babies out there just waiting for a lawsuit.

Maki box @ US$300

[Anonymous Coward]

http://makibox.com/

I've yet not tried it but not heard any major disasters.

Re:Maki box @ US$300

[gl4ss]

printrbot simple is 300 bucks too.

but really, it doesn't print metal. metal depositing printer by some means that works is a big deal even if you can get a crappy cnc that does metal somewhat for 1000-3000 bucks.

Re:Maki box @ US$300

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

http://makibox.com/
I've yet not tried it but not heard any major disasters.

Based on your very thorough review of this product, I'm seriously considering ordering one.

Re:Maki box @ US$300

[gazita123]

printrbot simple is 300 bucks too.

The MakiBox LT is $200 and is the same basic specs to the Simple. The $300 MakiBox HT does ABS and has a heated print bed.

Re:Maki box @ US$300

[Anonymous Coward]

Bad website. The home page must tell visitors what it's about. Are you selling something? Are you a company or just a few hobbyists? Are you a hardware company or a software company? Are you modding something or is it original work? What the fuck is it that you do?

WHAT IS THE POINT ??

[Anonymous Coward]

If you make a lower receiver out of metal does that not make this all rather pointless !! What is needed is STRONGER plastic !!

Re:WHAT IS THE POINT ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Buy all the other parts off the record. No registration. Untraceable. Full auto. Deadly. All set? Go shoot a bear. Remove arms from bear. You have a right to those, just like your founding fathers sought.

Re:WHAT IS THE POINT ??

[davester666]

Now what the hell am I supposed to do with these bear arms?

I'm thinking maybe I should have just put on the wife-beater shirt instead...education wasn't so good back then, maybe they misspelled a word...

Re:WHAT IS THE POINT ??

[camperdave]

Now what the hell am I supposed to do with these bear arms?

I'm thinking maybe I should have just put on the wife-beater shirt instead...education wasn't so good back then, maybe they misspelled a word...

This! It's so obvious that the founding fathers were enshrining the right to wear short sleeved shirts: the right to bare arms.

Guns...Lots Of Guns

[BlueStrat]

Either the US government rapidly steps in to quash or severely-restrict this technology in the US or their plans to disarm the US population will die stillborn.

I love the smell of dying government tyranny in the morning.

I wonder if the firmware/plans they're offering for free will see a Defense Distributed-style clamp down?

Strat

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[El Puerco Loco]

More like the wingnuts who attempt to print their own guns will end up disarming, or at least dishanding themselves.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Either the US government rapidly steps in to quash or severely-restrict this technology in the US or their plans to disarm the US population will die stillborn.

If you knew anything about guns, you'd know it only takes a few basic tools and materials to make a functional gun that goes bang without killing its user. You don't need a 3D printer. There's no way to disarm anybody in any circumstances.

I love the smell of dying government tyranny in the morning.

Wishful thinking... It's not the lack of guns that keeps your tyrannical government in place, it's the lack of courage in a population that has turned bovine, uneducated, and more interested in shopping and watching reality shows on TV than in fighting for liberty and moral principles.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Either the US government rapidly steps in to quash or severely-restrict this technology in the US or their plans to disarm the US population will die stillborn.

If you knew anything about guns, you'd know it only takes a few basic tools and materials to make a functional gun that goes bang without killing its user. You don't need a 3D printer. There's no way to disarm anybody in any circumstances.

I love the smell of dying government tyranny in the morning.

Wishful thinking... It's not the lack of guns that keeps your tyrannical government in place, it's the lack of courage in a population that has turned bovine, uneducated, and more interested in shopping and watching reality shows on TV than in fighting for liberty and moral principles.

It's kind of funny that Americans with all their guns seems to have a more tyrannical government than countries with fewer guns but a lot more political engagement from the population.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[gl4ss]

dying government tyranny? did it die when full auto weapons were legal to buy in USA? no?

you really think it's just a matter of weapons? fuck no it isn't. not at all. most people just don't want to revolt, stopping government tyranny is first and foremost a political problem of mobilizing people to your cause, arming them is easy.

you think they're going to ban bicycle shops and hotrod shops full of 5 axis cnc's and cnc lathes? ban vocational colleges? ban drills and metal stock? but why the fuck would you bother even with those when you could go visit your neighborhood gang to buy the guns. does having guns help them from government interference? not really, no..

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[jonbryce]

Making guns is easy. Getting hold of the ammo is a lot more difficult and you can't print bullets yet.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

It's kind of funny that Americans with all their guns seems to have a more tyrannical government than countries with fewer guns but a lot more political engagement from the population.

That's because most Americans have added two boxes to the four boxes of liberty: the ice box and the idiot box. And they seem to have stopped using the four others.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[BlueStrat]

If you knew anything about guns, you'd know it only takes a few basic tools and materials to make a functional gun that goes bang without killing its user. You don't need a 3D printer. There's no way to disarm anybody in any circumstances.

I do know something about guns and about metal machining and fabrication work. Making a Sten is dead-simple. Heck, I've got the plans.

You're correct that between the staggering number of guns that already exist in the US (and the majority of rifles & shotguns never having been registered) combined with the ease with which a gun that's at least good enough to get an enemy's gun is to make conventionally, it seems pretty impractical in the short term.

However, there's "simple" for some people and then there's "simple" for everybody else. It's dead-simple *IF* you have a lathe, drill press, sheet metal brake, and maybe a mill depending, along with multiple other ancillary tools and pieces of equipment like an arbor press.

*AND* you *also* have the requisite training, skills, & experience to operate that fabricating equipment well enough to produce more than a modern-art piece or a way to assure that you never need worry if you lose one of your mittens and/or your sunglasses. It's not a trivial skill set in the least.

The difference here is that you basically only need the printer instead of a pole-barn full of expensive machine tools, plus you don't need any advanced machining & metal fabrication skills or training to fabricate high-quality components.

The printer/software and the plan file supplies the majority of the training, experience, and skills otherwise necessary, while replacing multiple expensive pieces of metal working & fabrication equipment while also requiring less space. More like residential garage/shed/basement-size instead of pole-barn size.

A metal printer would also be a much more practical solution in the city. The printer is also far more portable than a bunch of machine shop equipment. It can be relatively quickly moved between locations and concealed compared to normal tooling.

Wishful thinking... It's not the lack of guns that keeps your tyrannical government in place, it's the lack of courage in a population that has turned bovine, uneducated, and more interested in shopping and watching reality shows on TV than in fighting for liberty and moral principles.

I agree. However, I'm hopeful that people are beginning to wake the hell up. I haven't seen the current levels and breadth of dissatisfaction and anger with government since the '60s/'70s, nor anywhere near the current numbers of people who seriously think the government needs to spend less and have fewer powers, and are actively getting involved and doing something about it.

When was the last time you remember *this* happening?

http://conventionofstates.com/

There may yet still be hope. Especially if you consider it was only about 10% of the colonists at the time who were actively for the US Revolutionary War and independence from England.

Can we scrape up 10% with a brain and a spine these days? Who knows. We'll find out, I guess.

Maybe the concept of free men governing themselves by common agreement dies here forever, technology guaranteeing the jackboot continues forever grinding the human face underfoot.

Maybe humans need another few 10, 20, or 100s of thousands...maybe even millions...of years of evolutionary advancement before mankind is ready to leave kings, dictators, tyranny, and authoritarianism behind us.

Strat

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Confusador]

It's not like loading ammo is hard, and bullets are probably the easiest things for these machines to print.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[JaredOfEuropa]

If you knew anything about guns, you'd know it only takes a few basic tools and materials to make a functional gun that goes bang without killing its user. You don't need a 3D printer.

The scary/interesting part about 3d printed guns is that you don't have to know anything about guns or metalworking to produce one. Download a good design, print, assemble, charge, and fire.

Of course there's still a few issues, such as: accurate printing in metal still isn't widely available for consumers, operating a 3d printer requires some skill, parts still need finishing, need for ammo, printed guns are prone to failing and/or blowing up when fired, etc. But all of these are problems that can (and probably will) be solved.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to marry a little girl. Can I do that in the next free america?
The federal and state governments say I cannot marry a little girl. The federal government says if I go to another country and marry a sweet adorable little girl they will imprison me. I do not like obeying the american religion.

They enforce their religion all over the world and force every country in the world to adopt it. No child brides, Only marrying women or men or men+men or woman+woman, never marrying a girl. They bulldoze over the oldtestament (fine with child brides (read deuteronomy 22 28-29 in hebrew, about rpe of young girl (from infancy till adolecence), you keep her and pay her father, so obviously marrying young girls is fine), the muslim religion, the vedic religion, everything.

They say 5 to 10 years for any disobediance to them, and life imprison for any real defiance of their fucking religion. I hate them.
I have hated them since I was three.

They burn people alive who try to make or have a different religion then them (waco), and say it's justified because they married young women (let alone girls). I want them who burn people alive to be crucified as revenge, but they always get away. Now they drone bomb little girls and their families in places where men still marry female children.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[necro81]

However, there's "simple" for some people and then there's "simple" for everybody else. It's dead-simple *IF* you have a lathe, drill press, sheet metal brake, and maybe a mill depending, along with multiple other ancillary tools and pieces of equipment like an arbor press.

*AND* you *also* have the requisite training, skills, & experience to operate that fabricating equipment well enough to produce more than a modern-art piece or a way to assure that you never need worry if you lose one of your mittens and/or your sunglasses. It's not a trivial skill set in the least.

The difference here is that you basically only need the printer instead of a pole-barn full of expensive machine tools, plus you don't need any advanced machining & metal fabrication skills or training to fabricate high-quality components.

This machine they are touting is a MIG welder on a 3-axis stage. Whatever it makes will be a large pile of weld bead. Just how good of a gun do you think you could make with that? (Or most any part, for that matter.) The number of finish operations required will be long and arduous - and require most of the machine tools and skills you've just mentioned. You may as well start with billet.

Maybe a low-cost metal 3D printer will come along that makes it "simple for everybody else," but this one sure ain't that.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[cmaxb]

authoritarianism starts in the family . . government merely perpetuates the upbringing we are most comfortable with . .

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Wishful thinking... It's not the lack of guns that keeps your tyrannical government in place, it's the lack of courage in a population that has turned bovine, uneducated, and more interested in shopping and watching reality shows on TV than in fighting for liberty and moral principles.

Oh please.

An educated person would know that it's foolhardy to put your life and the lives of your kids in jeopardy by "fighting back" at an institution which is completely and utterly insulated from whatever you try to do against them. They have the money, the power, and will fucking RUIN you to get rid of any troublemakers. An educated person knows when to fight, and when to accept reality.

There's a lot at stake in putting your life (or just your livelihood) by going against a Government. You might argue that it's the only way real change can be made, and you'd probably be right. But you need everyone to do the same thing, and honestly, for all the shit people have to deal with in modern life it's still a lot better than it could be. No-one really wants to rock the boat and risk losing that.

David and Goliath is a story. An educated person knows that in the real world, not every story has a happy ending. There's too much at personal stake to stick your head out sometimes. I absolutely guarantee you're all talk and no action yourself. But hey, it sounds nice and makes you look all big and educated for saying what's pretty fucking obvious to EVERYONE. We KNOW fighting the Government is the only way things will change. But it's not bad enough and there's not enough despair in enough people to push towards anything happening. It's only when people en mass have nothing left to lose that they'll do this... and people have everything to lose.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[MrNaz]

http://hexus.net/tech/news/peripherals/62261-direct-metal-laser-sintering-used-3d-print-working-metal-pistol/

You were saying?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[RabidReindeer]

It's kind of funny that Americans with all their guns seems to have a more tyrannical government than countries with fewer guns but a lot more political engagement from the population.

There are times when I think the whole 2nd Amendment thing may be doing us more harm than good. We don't take political action when we should because if things get too bad we can just haul out our guns.

Except that by the time guns are the best or only solution, we've already lost pretty much everything anyhow. And who (aside from fantasists) really want a life that's basically nothing but guerilla warfare against tanks and drones?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[csumpi]

More like the wingnuts who attempt to print their own guns will end up disarming, or at least dishanding themselves.

In the end you should be happy, because it guarantees pussies like yourself the freedom of speach, even if you have no idea what you are talking about, or how things work.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[csumpi]

It's kind of funny that Americans with all their guns seems to have a more tyrannical government than countries with fewer guns but a lot more political engagement from the population.

The US government is more powerful than any other. Now just imagine if there were no guns in the hands of the little people. Thankfully, whoever wrote the constitution, understood this completely.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Sique]

I can't remember one event in the history of the U.S. where guns in the hand of little people made the U.S. government rethink their policies and withdraw some legislation, measures or orders. Care to elaborate?

(But I can cite several events where voting ballots in the hands of little people made the U.S. government to either change policies or itself.)

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

> If you knew anything about guns, you'd know it only takes a few basic tools and materials to make a functional gun that goes bang without killing its user. You don't need a 3D printer. There's no way to disarm anybody in any circumstances.

Yeah, but that is a theoretical point. Still, you need theoretical and practical skills to build one, as well as time and money for experiments. This limits the practical availability. A 3D printer would allow you to print virtually everything without any skills, just by downloading a blueprint and buying a printer. This increases the practical availability by orders of magnitude.

It's the same as saying "Bugs in Linux are no problem. It's open source, so just fix them". Not everybody is a programmer, and not every programmer has the time to track down and fix bugs.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Hognoxious]

It worked precisely once - when the US government was the British government.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[NormalVisual]

Not to mention that there are quite a few ABS plastic parts that will be exposed to UV for quite a long time during operation.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

pwhaaa haaa haaaa, that was funny!

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[NormalVisual]

Why would you print bullets when lead casting is so cheap and easy? The real sticking point is the availability of primers. You can make your own, but it's labor-intensive and there are some substantial safety issues involved.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[csumpi]

I can't remember one event in the history of the U.S. where guns in the hand of little people made the U.S. government rethink their policies and withdraw some legislation, measures or orders.

You are onto something. Just read exactly what you wrote a couple of times, and it might just click.

But if it doesn't, I give you a hint by setting the bold on a couple words.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure your zip gun backup plan has the US military quaking in its boots.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Guns have never protected freedom of speech. If you start to assemble a group of people with guns to revolt against the government you will be taken out without problem. There won't even be a public outcry about it because you would fit every definition of a domestic terrorist organization and the military will have a widespread support when they take you out.

It is the other way around, the freedom of speech makes it possible for you to voice your opinion and gather the tens of thousands necessary to stand against the government. If you are armed or not is irrelevant if you have the strength in numbers.
If gun ownership is legal or not is irrelevant since it is illegal to use them against your government regardless. If you intend to revolt then you might as well break the gun ownership law.

Also, you shouldn't call others pussies. Your freedom of speech was taken away form you with the "free speech zones" and you never lifted your guns to protect that right. You are just a hypocrite that uses arguments you don't believe in as an excuse to keep your toys.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

David and Goliath is a story. An educated person knows that in the real world, not every story has a happy ending.

Of course! That's what makes it a good story material - alleged testimony of unlikely event that once brought a relief during hard times. Stories are just lubricants for your minds and your will, they encourage you to commit to do what you would want to do anyway, if you weren't afraid of consequences of failure.

Having said that, I completely concur with your views. After all, David and Goliath is a story from an "nothing to lose / will lose everything even doing nothing" situation.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

He's talking about the people who use a $300 printrbot to try to print a zip gun, which then proceeds to blow up in their hand like a cheap firework.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[BlueStrat]

I can't remember one event in the history of the U.S. where guns in the hand of little people made the U.S. government rethink their policies and withdraw some legislation, measures or orders. Care to elaborate?

Here you go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

"The Battle of Athens (sometimes called the McMinn County War) was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local government in August 1946. The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of political corruption and voter intimidation."

You're welcome.

Strat

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, go ahead and use a home-built fabrication machine to produce weapon parts. That's at least two levels of production without quality control.

The thought of thousands of gun nuts accidentally blowing their faces off does make me smile a bit though. Natural selection.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[BlueStrat]

He's talking about the people who use a $300 printrbot to try to print a zip gun, which then proceeds to blow up in their hand like a cheap firework.

These are the same geniuses that kill/injure/maim themselves and others and destroy homes and property every single day doing things like putting a frozen turkey into a gas burner heated deep-fryer full of hot cooking oil, and uncountable numbers of other equally idiotic and extremely dangerous actions and worse.

You can't fix stupid by trying to idiot-proof the world. It's not possible, it cannot work, and it unfairly curtails everyone else's choices and freedoms.

Darwin gots' to get paid, yo.

Strat

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[BlueStrat]

Guns have never protected freedom of speech.

Warning! History lesson ahead.

Please exercise caution, as facts are known to the State of California to cause extreme mental anguish in those suffering from politically/ideologically-driven voluntary ignorance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

Strat

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

From the wiki:

"The new government encountered challenges including at least eleven resignations of county administrators.[citation needed] On January 4, 1947, four of the five leaders of the GI Non-Partisan League declared in an open letter: "We abolished one machine only to replace it with another and more powerful one in the making."[11] The League failed to establish itself permanently and traditional political parties soon returned to power.[7]"

You were saying?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[JDG1980]

This device is slated to cost about £1000 (roughly $1650). For the same price, you can already buy a half-decent CNC machine, and that machine will be able to make a far better firearm than the 3D printer can.

I don't understand why gun nuts have this obsession with 3D printing. Making a weapon by fusing tiny bits of plastic or metal together will always generate an inferior product compared to milling the parts from solid blocks. Probably even inferior to stamping them from sheet metal.

People have made jury-rigged "zip guns" from regular hardware-store materials for decades. I don't see how making an inferior version of the same thing using a $1000+ device is a step forward technologically.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

The new government encountered challenges including at least eleven resignations of county administrators.[citation needed] On January 4, 1947, four of the five leaders of the GI Non-Partisan League declared in an open letter: "We abolished one machine only to replace it with another and more powerful one in the making."[11] The League failed to establish itself permanently and traditional political parties soon returned to power.[7]

You were saying?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[camperdave]

So, he admits he can't remember any event, and instead of supplying him with a list of events, or even one single event, you just reiterate his admission. How about you stop being the armchair quarterback, put your shoulder to the wheel, and cite something.

... or is it that you can't remember one event either?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[csumpi]

Haha, you should reread what you wrote a couple of times, too. You even used bold to give yourself a hint ; )

You are asking why you need to have a polio shot when there was not even one single case of polio in the US since 1979. I mean you are right, it's hard to explain if it's not obvious.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

They haven't done anything to quash CNC milling machines, which small table-top milling machines plus a conversion kit have been available for a long time. Cheap, full sized milling machines are approaching the $1-2k price range now due to cheap Chinese built ones. Price comes down to mostly how accurate you need it, and if you are going to have time to screw around with getting a 3d printer still in development working, you have more than enough time to use traditional equipment to build gun parts.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Kielistic]

A million dollar machine shop can build a gun. No one has ever had any doubt about that.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[El Puerco Loco]

I'm guessing most tinfoil hat types don't have tens of thousands of dollars and an team of engineers at their disposal. I imagine consumer grade models will use something like pot metal rather than stainless steel. And even this .45 is surely not as strong as the forged barrels of production weapons. I wonder what would happen if they tried to print a functional .30-06 M1 Garand?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[camperdave]

Ah! I see now. What you're saying is that it has never happened. Well, why didn't you say so plainly, instead of being coy about it?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[El Puerco Loco]

When this thing can print hellfire missles and reaper drones to carry them, then maybe the government will get worried.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[bobaferret]

You do realize that the site you're recommending is financed by the koch brothers right? Not trying to stir things up, just an FYI. I can't support any movement that's back by large corporations asking for more deregulation. I think People need less regulation, not the corporations. I'm tired of living in a country that's on the brink of fascism.

"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power."
-Benito Mussolini -

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand why gun nuts have this obsession with 3D printing. Making a weapon by fusing tiny bits of plastic or metal together will always generate an inferior product compared to milling the parts from solid blocks. Probably even inferior to stamping them from sheet metal.

People have made jury-rigged "zip guns" from regular hardware-store materials for decades. I don't see how making an inferior version of the same thing using a $1000+ device is a step forward technologically.

We don't have an obsession with 3D printing. The media does. Many of the real firearms enthusiasts view it as mildly interesting, but not terribly practical. Anyone can make a 12 gauge shotgun from about $10-20 of parts from Home Depot. The people who seem to be really following this 3D printing thing are really only a subset of firearms enthusiasts and tech nerds. Essentially, where the two groups overlap. They have knowledge of firearms and knowledge of tech. 3D printing of guns and gun parts fits both.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[chihowa]

He's talking about the American Revolution. His coy act is obnoxious, but your deliberate obtuseness is annoying, too.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[internerdj]

Interesting statistic that came out this thanksgiving was that deep frying a turkey is more likely to kill you than a shark attack...

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[tmosley]

I guess you forgot about the Revolutionary War.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[niado]

The so-called "Battle of Athens" was not an armed insurrection against the US Government - it was an armed encounter vs. a, by all accounts, extremely corrupt local government whose activities seemed to mirror that of a small organized crime conglomerate.

There were no US government forces involved, nor was the national guard mobilized by the Governor of Tennessee.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[tmosley]

Not really. It's just that Snowden's revelations have focused more on the US than other countries. Most other Western countries are just as bad, and will only get worse as their economies continue to deteriorate (same with the US).

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[tmosley]

What he is saying is that guns in the hands of the populace PREVENT such things from ever even being discussed, sort of like how no-one ever discusses building a residential development inside the caldera of a volcano. That would just be stupid. But take away the magma, and it might just happen.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[camperdave]

He's talking about the American Revolution. His coy act is obnoxious, but your deliberate obtuseness is annoying, too.

I am not an American, so if there is some American cultural reference linking "one single event" and the American Revolution, you'll have to forgive me for not picking up on the hint. Besides, the American revolution is not an example of the US government changing its policies because the US population is armed because there was no US, or US government, or US population (armed or otherwise) at the time.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Way to miss the point.

Guns didn't win that battle. Without the freedom of speech and the right to assembly there wouldn't even have been a battle, just a lone gun-nut.
The fact that they weren't just gunned down has more to do with the Sheriff not wanting to kill the opposition than with superior firepower.

Again, a thousand men without guns are better equipped with dealing with the government than ten men armed to the teeth. Not because of superior strength but because of higher legitimacy.
The guns will only work as long as the government aren't willing to shoot you.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

In the end you should be happy, because it guarantees pussies like yourself the freedom of speach

What's "speach"? Is that anything like spackling?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[niftydude]

Shark attacks are rare. Another interesting statistic is that you are more likely to be bitten by a New Yorker than a shark.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

The real sticking point is the availability of primers. You can make your own, but it's labor-intensive and there are some substantial safety issues involved.

All true.

The more interesting question is, when is someone going to design a gun and corresponding ammo optimized for home fabrication?

  Sure, today ammo is plentiful enough (although that's been changing over the past year or so) that it's not worth going to something else ... at least not in the US. But when/where that changes, there might be other design choices that make more sense. Primers or percussion caps aren't the only way of igniting propellant. Maybe something electrical or even optical (e.g. using the laser diode out of a blue-ray) might make an easier-to-fab weapon.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

How about the battle of athens?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes... the (presumably American) Revolutionary War was totally about freedom of speech.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[iluvcapra]

The Revolutionary War was about home rule, with specific points of contention over taxing of commodities, and the independence and impartiality of the judicial system. This is why most of the founders were importers, farmers and lawyers, silly.

Britons in the 18th century, with the exception of certain kinds of lese majeste, basically had free speech that any American would recognize.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

I read a short bit a couple of years ago, I think it was in "A people's history of the united states", wherein a group of veterans came home from the war and decided they'd had enough corruption in their local town; they ended up guarding the ballot boxes against the local political machine at gunpoint. In the end, the ex-soldiers won, because the only reason the crooks stayed in office was a lot of ballot-stuffing.

  Guns are an important tool; this point sometimes gets lost when some of the more vocal gun folks start to fetishize them. OTOH, Anti-gun folks would do well to remember that it doesn't always have to be "You vs. the Entire U.S. Military" for guns to be useful. (And even then, various insurgents have shown that can be a lot more effective than you might think.)

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Try googling "NRA" or the "National Rifle Association".

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[chihowa]

Oh, I agree with you there. I just foresaw this thread continuing on in that manner forever and I wanted to make it stop!

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

It happens every day. Just think how the government would be if they did not have us to fear.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[fatphil]

I still find it odd that some citizens are so proud of something (the 2nd amendement) that is only of use when things are totally fucked.

Has it never occured to them to not let things get quite so fucked in the first place?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[garyebickford]

Heck, a reasonably talented and careful machinist could build a gun with a wood lathe, a drill and a few files. I may have left something out, but that's pretty much it. Maybe a chisel or two and a hammer.

For that matter, my neighbor (when I was a kid) built a 3 inch pipe cannon when he was young. It fired rocks over a mile. IIRC he had most of the barrel buried in dirt, which would explain why he didn't get sliced and diced by shrapnel from the barrel exploding. He's long dead of old age, so no details are available now.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[cusco]

There's a reason why all the printed guns use pistol rounds, it's because the powder load is so much smaller. A pistol round will put a dent and possibly a hole in a car door, a rifle round will go through the door, through the driver and passenger, and out the other door.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[JamieIanMacgregor]

if you only require a resolution of 5mm per step for your print, it'll be just fine. anything better - yup, pile of poo prepare for metal minecraft yodas and nick cage faced cats.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[JamieIanMacgregor]

I've always wondered if you could dissolve the lumps off kids cap gun cap strips into water to form a paste then let set in an empty shell (.22) or primer cap (larger) to suffice as primer. would be safer that trying to make your own from scratch, when wet there should be very little risk of premature detonation. anyone tried this? I know hammering a whole pack of cap strips in one go makes one hell of a bang.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[BlueStrat]

Way to miss the point.

Guns didn't win that battle. Without the freedom of speech and the right to assembly there wouldn't even have been a battle, just a lone gun-nut.

Sorry, but you're the one missing (intentionally?) the point.

The sheriff and his armed deputies illegally took the ballot boxes containing the people's votes...their speech...by armed force, threatening to shoot anyone who tried to stop them.

Votes = speech.

Guns in the hands of citizens willing to use them against those armed & threatening men acting illegally and un-Constitutionally "under color of law" as agents of the State prevented that speech from being suppressed/altered/corrupted by those agents of the State.

This is not rocket surgery.

The fact that they weren't just gunned down has more to do with the Sheriff not wanting to kill the opposition than with superior firepower.

Might try reading what went on. There was a gun battle in which the sheriff and his deputies were holed-up in a courthouse and certainly tried to "shoot the opposition". The citizens, thankfully, had superior firepower. After a hail of return-fire from the citizens, they were then able to approach and dynamite the door and take control of the ballot boxes and take the deputies into custody.

Here's a couple of videos you should watch for your edification.

Battle of Athens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgspMlPP7bA

Innocents Betrayed: The History Of Gun Control: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUmKT43j4Tc

Strat

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh, a Wilhelm Reich fan, eh?

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the very DEFINITION of "an armed insurrection against the US Government". They don't stop being the government because they're corrupt.

"There were no US government forces involved"

"an armed encounter vs. a, by all accounts, extremely corrupt local government"

Pick one of those two. You can't have both of them.

Re:Guns...Lots Of Guns

[Anonymous Coward]

http://conventionofstates.com/ [conventionofstates.com]

This will never happen, and that's a good thing. Look at what they're advocating. Talk about throwing the baby, the house, and most of the continent out with the bathwater...

3D printed guns.

[bejiitas_wrath]

This will be the next thing demonised in the media, even though the technology has many positive benefits in terms of manufacturing. But after printing the object do you still need to trim it and sand it down? Maybe you print it slightly oversize and then trim it down to smooth it out. What is the exact finishing process with this tech?

Re:3D printed guns.

[felrom]

The demonization has been going on for a while. Here's an article from almost a year ago: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/18/meet-steve-israel-the-congressman-who-wants-to-ban-3d-printable-guns-qa/

Steve Israel wants to ban your access to 3d printers, and he's using guns as a way to get the camel's nose under the tent. Here are some particularly telling quotes from the interview in the story linked above:

What we’re trying to do is make it clear that if you choose to construct a weapon or weapon component using a 3D printer, and it’s homemade, you’ll be subject to penalties.

Catch that? If you're a business, doing it for commercial gain, then he thinks it's okay. If you're the little guy, doing it as a hobby, then simply doing it even if no one ever gets hurt will get you sent to jail.

Steve Israel: But if you’re going to download a blueprint for a plastic weapon that can be brought onto an airplane, there’s a penalty to be paid.

Interviewer: Just for downloading it?

Steve Israel: No, no, for actually manufacturing it. And we’re not even going after manufacturers, either, but lone wolves, individuals.

Again there, if you're a business he's fine. If you're an individual, it's banned. He even slips and admits he want to criminalize the sharing of the information.

So we’re talking to stakeholders, and working to create a distinction between that lone wolf and legitimate manufacturers of plastic clips.

Make no mistake: the forces working to ban private ownership of 3d printers are already moving against you. The bogey man of undetectable guns is simply a convenient way to get people on board with the first step of restriction. Once that's in place another big-business congressman will come back and say, "Poor GM is losing money because it can't sell overpriced factory parts because people are just printing them. Ban all private 3d printer ownership!"

The only thing in question is how many people will be fooled and take up the torch and pitchfork against 3d printed guns, not realizing that they're working against their own desire to have privately owned 3d printing technology. As is commonly the case, the fight for gun rights is only a microcosm in the larger fight for natural and civil rights. You want 3d printers? You're going to have to fight to protect 3d printed guns. You want marijuana legalized? You're going to have to fight for private ownership of machine guns. You want to continue to be free from poll taxes? You're going to have to support repealing the NFA.

Issues of law and politics don't each exist in separate vacuums.

Re:3D printed guns.

[Anonymous Coward]

Creating a weapon or weapon component for your own use is not illegal. Why would they be subject to penalties?

Re:3D printed guns.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're allowed to own handguns then why not a minigun?

Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[vadim_t]

It's not really clear what it's doing. The photos show square bits of metal, and no signs of any kind of additive manufacturing. This looks more like a computer controlled metal cutter. Which is nice and all, but not really a 3D printer.

When I heard "metal printer" I thought it was a laser sintering machine or something of that kind.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its a MIG welder with a moving base plate. This means the resolution will be quite poor (like 4-5mm wide draw path) and you will need to print onto a metal plate/base and then cut it off after if required. Despite its limitations it is an interesting concept.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[drinkypoo]

But is the resolution actually that bad? Because that would be quite useless. You'd have to machine the final product in practically every case.

I guess we'll never know, because the linked article was hosted on a cracker jack box. Techienews indeed.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[tgd]

But is the resolution actually that bad? Because that would be quite useless. You'd have to machine the final product in practically every case.

I guess we'll never know, because the linked article was hosted on a cracker jack box. Techienews indeed.

Yes, it would be that bad. I can't imagine there's really any use for a "printer" like that ... you'd end up with a messy blob of metal with little strength that would need more machining to make useful than it would take to just CNC... or use a real sintering printer.

Its sort of a cool hack, but ... I mean, if you want a non-plastic printer, make one that prints out cookie dough. At least you'd get something tasty out of it.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[u38cg]

This thing is a proof-of-concept, mostly designed to let other people get started and improve it. I don't see anything about the technique itself that couldn't be miniaturised.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[drinkypoo]

Yes, it would be that bad.

Citation needed. The paper does not in fact specify the feature size, but it does say it's related to wire size. I think it's much smaller than you think.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[Bob the Super Hamste]

The problem is that while a finer wire can produce a smaller weld bead it is still rather substantial compared to the wire that was used. Go with too fine of wire and the resistance will get to high and you will just vaporize the wire and foul tips. For example really fine wire (what I use for automotive sheet metal work) is .024" in diameter and there is still a fair amount of work to clean it up so you would never know the weld was there.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[Bob the Super Hamste]

Yes a mig welder could be miniaturized further but you wouldn't want it. For the best quality work you will want to be running gas shielded not flux core wire and thus need rather large tanks since this will probably take a while. Now add in that you need a good transformer for the welder as well as good tensioners and drive motors and it isn't going to be getting much smaller. There are already some cheap crappy ones available and while they may work out of the box the question is if they will work for any length of time. Good welders are rather large and heavy, the one I have is about as small and light as one can be made and not be trash and I have the add on gas kit.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[JamieIanMacgregor]

it'll be perfect if you'd like to print yourself a full sized replica of the titanic, that will be some big-ass x.y.z axis though.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[camperdave]

Any reason you can't seal the build chamber, flood it with the welding gas (about a couple of cubic feet should do) and use a simple wire feed welder? The reason the gas welder takes so much gas is that the gas escapes into the surrounding air.

Re:Does it actually print, or does it cut?

[tgd]

Yes, it would be that bad.

Citation needed. The paper does not in fact specify the feature size, but it does say it's related to wire size. I think it's much smaller than you think.

Years of welding experience.

Cue

[dutchwhizzman]

Cue Trinity in a long leather coat sitting behind a desk starting a printer.

This can't come about fast enough

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I first tried laser sintering 5 years ago - I got a few steel gun parts custom-made by a "printing" company, then mounted the parts in a real gun and got the proofhouse to shoot it until it died. I was working for a certain very well known luxury gunmaker at the time, and we were investigating new ways of producing parts in very small volume.

The laser sintered parts were as good as, or better than the original parts! And the prices are great too: we paid per cm3 of material "printed", which worked at at just under $900 for a receiver, as opposed to $7500 for the equivalent part machined with conventional tools.

I've known since then that this is the future of metalworking. As a result, I've been holding off upgrading the lathe and the milling machine in my workshop, because I've been waiting for a metal-building machine that doesn't cost a quarter million bucks.

This $1000 thing probably won't be it, but the next generation machines, or the generations after them, will. At last!

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't laser sintering. Its using a MIG welder like a plastic 3D printer uses filament.

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[drinkypoo]

The laser sintered parts were as good as, or better than the original parts!

But does that mean that the sintered parts were good, or that the originals are shit? You haven't given us enough information (make, model, caliber, and year of firearm to start with, not to mention the actual parts) to make this determination ourselves.

I'm only skeptical because "powder metal" (large-volume sintering) is shit. A PM conn rod for a 7.3 powerstroke is twice as likely to fail and has 1/10 as desirable a failure mode as the forged part; it's ten times more likely to break rather than simply bending.

This $1000 thing probably won't be it, but the next generation machines, or the generations after them, will. At last!

This certainly isn't it, because it's using a MIG welder. This is a traditional metal deposition process, using a 3d printer for positioning.

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

But does that mean that the sintered parts were good, or that the originals are shit? You haven't given us enough information (make, model, caliber, and year of firearm to start with, not to mention the actual parts) to make this determination ourselves.

Well, I can't give you any specifics (make/model) or I'd reveal whom I worked for, and I'm under a non-disclosure agreement.

But here's an example of what I experienced with the sintered metal:

I took a test side-by-side 12 cal which had silver-brazed demi block barrels made of high-quality Bohler steel. I had a lock printed. All we did to the lock was polish it a bit to achieve perfect fit in the receiver, when we shot the gun repeatedly in double-shot with proofhouse loads (+30% powder). At some point, a rather massive 2-mm disjunction occured at the breech. We figured the lock's metal had given way. In fact it was the barrel's lugs that had flattened themselves onto the lock, and the lock itself was just fine. We were really amazed!

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[drinkypoo]

Interesting, but still not clear why the failure occurred.

A very quick browse of available literature (VERY) suggests that laser sintering produces a very fine crystal structure, which suggests that the laser-sintered metal will have the same problem as other types of sintered metal. That fine crystal structure is inferior to a large grain structure. Parts will snap instead of bending when they do finally fail if sintered as compared to forged, or machined from forged billet.

Still cool for prototyping, and lots of parts. I'd rather have laser-sintered parts in my gun than traditional powder metal. I'd rather have parts made from forged billet than either.

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I can't give you any specifics (make/model) or I'd reveal whom I worked for, and I'm under a non-disclosure agreement.

Come on we all know you work for Boss Hog.

Captcha for this post distills

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[Anonymous Coward]

12 cal? Yeah, your story checks out! /s

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[mpoulton]

12 cal? Yeah, your story checks out! /s

For you edification, the firearm he is describing appears to be a very high-end double rifle, in "12 bore" size (0.739"). That is a dangerous game rifle, and may well cost over $100,000.

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[ScentCone]

Open up a copy of the Double Gun Journal, and then come back to apologize.

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[Anonymous Coward]

> I was working for a certain very well known luxury gunmaker at the time

Smith and Lexus?

Re:This can't come about fast enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Apples and oranges. Powdered metal connecting rods are made from powdered metal that is compressed and heated, not laser sintered. The material properties are not the same.

Sigh.

[StripedCow]

Wake me up when we can print silicon.

Any developments in this direction? It surely would be possible to print a 1950's type of transistor at home, right?

Re:Sigh.

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I'll be more impressed when it's capable of printing a vaccuum tube...

Re:Sigh.

[RabidReindeer]

Wake me up when we can print silicon.

Any developments in this direction? It surely would be possible to print a 1950's type of transistor at home, right?

We already print silicon. That's how Intel and AMD make their chips. Print masks and deposit materials through the masks.

Ohhhh. You wanted a home printer for silicon!

Seriously, take a look at the photo of the original transistor. Not exactly a work of beauty there. But the hard part about making more sophisticated chips is in refining and doping the silicon. Granted, you probably don't have ion-deposition equipment in an old closet either, but you can't just build micro-electronics from the kids sandbox.

Re:Sigh.

[RabidReindeer]

I'll be more impressed when it's capable of printing a vaccuum tube...

Printing a metal-shelled tube shouldn't be that hard.

Printing the vacuum, on the other hand.

Re: Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can, it's called epitaxy via CVD or PVD.

Re:Sigh.

[JanneM]

I'll be more impressed when it's capable of printing a vaccuum tube...

Printing a metal-shelled tube shouldn't be that hard.

Printing the vacuum, on the other hand.

Attach a small fan to it as an air-printing attachment, then turn the power plug 180 degrees so it runs backwards. Do I really have to think of everything around here?

Re:Sigh.

[Big Hairy Ian]

Wake me up when we can print silicon.

Any developments in this direction? It surely would be possible to print a 1950's type of transistor at home, right?

We already print silicon. That's how Intel and AMD make their chips. Print masks and deposit materials through the masks.

Ohhhh. You wanted a home printer for silicon!

Seriously, take a look at the photo of the original transistor. Not exactly a work of beauty there. But the hard part about making more sophisticated chips is in refining and doping the silicon. Granted, you probably don't have ion-deposition equipment in an old closet either, but you can't just build micro-electronics from the kids sandbox.

Actually we print on thin slivers of silicon. You wouldn't accuse a Xerox of printing paper would you?

Re:Sigh.

[Neil Boekend]

Make it in space. It's cooler and the vacuum would be easy.

Re:Sigh.

[Whorhay]

Or use a multiple material printer and as you build up the walls fill it with liquid mercury, and add a small valve. When the tube is completed let the mercury drain out for the most part, it should pull a vacume behind it, and then permanently close the valve.

Historically you would make the vacume tube and then put it through a process to create the vacume and seal the tube. One of the better was of creating the vacume was to attach the tube to a tube trap through which mercury was dripped. The space between each drip of mercury would pull out a little more atmosphere.

Recursive self printers near at hand?

[ignavus]

Right now I am imagining a bug that causes a self-printing printer to go out of control, so that the printers keeps printing printers that keep printing printers that keep ...

Re:Recursive self printers near at hand?

[RabidReindeer]

Right now I am imagining a bug that causes a self-printing printer to go out of control, so that the printers keeps printing printers that keep printing printers that keep ...

Cue up Paul Dukas. Bomp-de-bomp-de-bomp-de-bompitty...

Re:Recursive self printers near at hand?

[OmniGeek]

In 1955, Philip K. Dick wrote a short story, "Autofac", about self-replicating machinery. Still a good read, IMO.

Re:Recursive self printers near at hand?

[camperdave]

Right now I am imagining a bug that causes a self-printing printer to go out of control, so that the printers keeps printing printers that keep printing printers that keep ...

It's called the Sorcerer's Apprentice.

Re:Recursive self printers near at hand?

[Big Hairy Ian]

That's just Mickey Mouse :)

One step closer...

[Jamlad]

to the grey RepRap plague. When will this madness ever end?!

undoing mod points

[Prehensile Interacti]

Gah - clicky error

Why was this modded down?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why was this modded down? You're feminist scum is that why? Good boys who obey?

bah

[Anonymous Coward]

Builded, you moron.

508 resource limit reached

[Anonymous Coward]

Resource Limit Is Reached
The website is temporarily unable to service your request as it exceeded resource limit. Please try again later.

Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

You got cause and effect reversed. There are thousands of places in the world where anyone can buy/own any kind of weapon one wants. Most of them have crappy standard of living. Just look how many times guns were used against tyranny that produced enduring democracies instead of next set of tyrants? How many times freedom of expression against oppressors liberated people and created enduring democracies? Guns are the tools are up-and-coming tyrants against existing tyrants.

The freedom of expression, used by people willing to suffer the consequences of standing up to tyrants, their ability to inspire millions of ordinary people to rise up against tyranny is what creates a thriving democracy with great standard of living. That is when warrior wannabes like you strut around claiming to be the cause. You are the effect, not the cause, of the first amendment.

Trying your "second amendment solutions" against a lawfully elected government of the USA is rebellion, and it is constitutional for the government to put such insurrection using any means necessary. If the government is restrained it is because of the first amendment rights of people who would speak up against heavy handed tactics by the government. Definitely not because of your puny little glocks, brownings or bushmasters. Our army had been battling AK-47s and IEDs for ages now buddy, you don't stand a chance against our army. You are able to trash talk, only because we restrain our government against taking overt and open actions against US Citizens.

Just look around you. People who used guns to overthrow tyrants became tyrants themselves. People who spoke out and inspired ordinary people to rise up against tyranny created enduring democracies. Only in such democracies crazy wingnuts are able to run around waving their guns thinking they somehow are the protection against tyranny.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[csumpi]

You got cause and effect reversed.

You got the whole point missed. Right to bear is not medicine. It's vaccine.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. If you use it after you're sick, you're dead. And when you're immune system is compromised (ie the very people who should be the most vigilant about government over reach being coopted by our corporate masters into believing their faith based Mammon lies) then it is utterly useless.

As are conservatives at this point.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

You got the whole point missed. Right to bear is not medicine. It's vaccine.

Very funny, probably true too. Vaccines are just viruses rendered impotent. Glad you agree you guys are just armed thugs rendered impotent.

You are free to dwell in your realms of fantasy. Right to bear arms is constitutional in USA, and if it provides you some solace and some way to compensate for your feelings of inadequacy, go ahead, buy all the guns you can afford and even pretend you are somehow a liberator.

And we will protect your rights too.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

And we will protect your rights too.

That's the best part! +1 Funny

The impotent thugs are certainly not keeping this place free from tyranny, true. Looking around at the US (and world) around us, it's clear that you aren't protecting anyone's rights at all. Talk about dwelling in realms of fantasy!

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[tmosley]

Good thing you weren't around in the 1930's. The Nazis would have sent you in ahead of their troops, and they'd have been able to march to Oporto, The Bering Strait, and the Cape of Good Hope.

Freedom of expression doesn't really help against invading armies.

As to the US government "Our army had been battling AK-47s and IEDs for ages now buddy, you don't stand a chance against our army"

Why can't I hold all these lulz? You really think the us military would win a war against 10,000,000 guerillas armed with rifles in the middle of both their supply lines and their manufacturing base? Never mind the fact that you probably live next door to one or more. Talk about a fucking red zone. You talk about "rising up" while also wanting individual people to be disarmed. The doublethink is so enormous I can't believe your head hasn't exploded. The kinds of guns you are talking about "enabling the next set of tyrants" aren't rifles in the hands of the citizens. You are talking about tanks, helicopters, and APCs. You know, the kinds of things that GOVERNMENTS have. Rifles in the hands of citizens have never been used to oppress ANYONE, and YOU KNOW IT.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[serviscope_minor]

People who used guns to overthrow tyrants became tyrants themselves.

Like the founding fathers?

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

We fought the Nazis with our professional military. Not folks engaging in gun nuttery. Freedom of expression does not help against invading armies, that is why we have professional army.

Now suddenly you change your point of view and start talking about raising up in rebellion against our own army! Our own government! You little gun twits, if you were a real threat to our democracy we will put you down, using any means necessary, and it is constitutional to do so too. You rise against our duly elected government, you are an enemy of our constitution. It is the sworn duty of our Executive to fight you. You don't get to shoot down government officials because you think what they do is unconstitutional.

Rifles in the hands of citizens have never been used to oppress ANYONE, and YOU KNOW IT.

What a load of crap. Rifles in the hands of citizens who call themselves rebels, helps them grab power and to become the next government. They become even more tyrannical because they owe their power to bullets, not ballots. They are scared of the next set of rebels. They don't worry about people or ballots. If you what you say is true, South America and Africa should be veritable gardens of Democracy.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

People who used guns to overthrow tyrants became tyrants themselves.

Like the founding fathers?

Got anything more recent in the last two centuries? eh?

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[stdarg]

Just look how many times guns were used against tyranny that produced enduring democracies instead of next set of tyrants?

Well at least a few times.

How many times freedom of expression against oppressors liberated people and created enduring democracies?

Zero? What are you talking about?

That is when warrior wannabes like you strut around claiming to be the cause. You are the effect, not the cause, of the first amendment.

Calling it an issue of cause and effect doesn't really make sense. But there's no doubt that warriors enabled both the 1st and 2nd amendment. You do know what was going on in this land before the Constitution was signed back in 1787? It involved warriors strutting around and shooting British soldiers. And one of them, a guy named George Washington, even became the first president.

Trying your "second amendment solutions" against a lawfully elected government of the USA is rebellion

You're claiming free speech can be used to overthrow governments as well. Guess what? That's still rebellion and it's also illegal. Or did you think America has unlimited free speech?

Definitely not because of your puny little glocks, brownings or bushmasters. Our army had been battling AK-47s and IEDs for ages now buddy, you don't stand a chance against our army.

Think about what you just said. Our army has been battling against AK-47s and IEDS (the "I" stands for improvised btw)... FOR AGES. Ages. That means "a long time." And you think, as a result, that people with small weapons "don't stand a chance?" Even though they've been battling for ages?

All that said, I agree with you that the right to bear arms does not cause our society to work well. But neither does the right to free speech. BOTH are effects of a good society. A good society is made up of good people who believe in the social contract. Free speech and the right to bear arms are marks of respect we have for each other because we believe our compatriots are as good as we are. The reason we let Joe Sixpack have a gun is that we trust Joe Sixpack to use that gun to defend himself, just like we want to defend ourselves. The reason we let Joe Sixpack have free speech is that we trust he has good intentions when he says something we disagree with. We even acknowledge that he may be right when we disagree so it's valuable to allow him to keep talking, even if in the short term it embarrasses us or hurts our feelings.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Smidge204]

More to the point: Congress has explicit authority to call upon the Militias to suppress insurrections, and so called the Militias are under the command of the President.

These are the same "Well Regulated Militias" mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.

So it seems rather ignorant for anyone to make claim to "2nd Amendment Solutions" as they are sometimes called, because in a strict interpretation of the US Constitution a "2nd Amendment Solution" as these people envision it would be to just shoot themselves.

The real reason for the 2nd, IMHO, is because the US is not supposed to have a professional army. That's also in the constitution: "To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years." Instead, private citizens were explicitly allowed to keep firearms so that in the event of invasion or insurrection, we would have a ready force to deal with it until a formal army could be put together instead of having to support an army in perpetuity.
=Smidge=

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, when did we get a democracy? I thought we had a Republic?

If we had a democracy, then the majority of the US would be a vastly different place.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[iluvcapra]

Most 20th century "tyrannies" took power with the support of an armed general population.

Hitler famously banned guns, but what people don't mention is that he only banned guns for Jews, while restrictions for the population in general were relaxed— and this, more than five years after he took power. How could it have been any other way? Before World War II, the SA and SS were nothing more than private citizens engaged in gun clubs with very spiffy outfits. Radical authoritarian governments, from the French Revolution on, have needed the help of armed popular movements in order to disrupt normal political process and intimidate resistance. These movements are pointedly at-will, quasi-organized assemblies of people acting of their own free will who want to kill their neighbors. And while these movements would possibly coordinate with elements of the government, they were never subordinate to it, and authoritarian governments are constantly trying (and failing) to rein in their own hit squads.

Gun control laws in the general case don't seem to correlate with tyranny, it's only when certain classes of people are armed while others are not (wether by law or otherwise) that we've historically seen problems.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

I agree with that interpretation, totally. Our founding fathers were very idealistic when it came to national defense. At least some of them would have been alive to see the war of 1812, the sacking of our capital and the burning of our Presidential Mansion (which was not called The White House then).

But even if we thing a time traveling mind readers have been installed as a justice of the Supreme Court, we need to obey their reading of that amendment. We have the freedom to disagree with them but unless we get enough votes to amend the constitution, we have to recognize, nay, defend, the rights of the gun nuts to all the guns they want.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

How many times freedom of expression against oppressors liberated people and created enduring democracies?

Zero? What are you talking about?

Gandhi. Mandela. Aung San Suu Kyi (work in progress).

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[stdarg]

Gandhi and his peace movement didn't accomplish anything in a vacuum. The reason the British empire collapsed around the world was its weakness after WWI and WWII -- weakness due to guns. I mean think about it.. it wasn't just India that was freed. Britain lost pretty much its entire empire. The Irish won their independence in 1919 through a war. Palestine and Israel were also born out of violence. Zionists were engaging in terrorist acts for years in a push for independence in Israel and Palestine, e.g. the attack on the King David Hotel. Read the part about reactions to the bombing at home. Keep in mind this was just a year before Indian independence.

If you are under the impression that Gandhi started giving speeches and going on hunger strikes and then the entire British empire collapsed because of him you are wrong. Even within India, you are apparently unaware of the widespread violence that had been going on for decades. Gandhi was the leader of the popular peaceful movement that history likes to remember, but he was not alone. There were many groups involved, most violent, and many scheming about what would happen after independence. There were groups that were encouraging domestic religious violence because they wanted to convince the British to go ahead and partition the country because they could never live together in peace. All of that had an affect on the British view of the situation. I mean look at stuff like Direct Action Day.

I knew you'd mention Gandhi but I'm shocked that you said Mandela, who CREATED and led the armed militant branch of the ANC. Peaceful guy huh?

We'll see about Aung San Suu Kyi.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[flappinbooger]

You got cause and effect reversed.

You got the whole point missed. Right to bear is not medicine. It's vaccine.

very insightful

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

OK. Interesting. But what then in the hypothetical case that the federal government (or state or whatever) *does* turn tyrannical and unconstitutional? It sounds like you're arguing the case for the government to do whatever the hell it wants and if the citizens decide to overthrow it and replace it with a properly constitutional government then you're saying the citizens are commiting treason?

I always thought that the people had to defend the constitution. Not a particular instance of duly elected officials acting badly.

So which is it?

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[KeensMustard]

Yes it's vaccine - a vaccination against the disease of democracy.

You are blind to what is obvious to everybody else. You have the right to carry a gun. You don't have the right to rebel against the government. If you rebel, you have broken the social contract between yourself and the government and the notions of which 'freedoms' the government respects and upholds are gone. Shoot at the US Military, break the contract with the US government, they will shoot you dead and go out for a bacon and egg breakfast after. You think your situation is different because you are permitted to carry a gun? You've been fooled - you've been indoctrinated to keep you compliant, to make you think you are special. You aren't special. You don't have more freedoms. Once the bullets start leaving the guns with deadly intent, do you think it matters to anyone whether both parties agree the guns were obtained legally in the past? Don't be so naive. Pull the trigger, and your rights are the same as a Pashtun, a Uiger, a Tibetan or a Tamil. The bit where you can carry a gun a fantasise about how it makes you powerful is just for pretend. You think rebellions are put down because the rebels can't get their hands on legal hand held weapons? Don't be stupid.

Instead this fantasy is encouraged by the US government and it's powerful backers. It keeps the US populace from protesting grave indignities using any means that would be effective. Consider two responses to the Snowden revelations.

City A, hearing the revelations, is outraged. They exercise the lesser options - taking to the streets in protest, striking, threatening to vote in ways that disrupt the status quo and then following through on those threats. The government and its backers are forced to take a conciliatory approach. No more spying.

City B, hearing the revelations, is outraged. But discussion at the public meeting takes a different tact. Someone yells "Revolution!" and immediately the outrage is dissipated. Some families have children in the military. Others, recognise that attempted revolution is useless, that there are no visionary leaders of the movement, and no-one they can see who they would trust to be in charge, that they would never sway popular opinion toward revolution on this issue alone. Still others, quite validly, see revolution as an overreaction. Still, having contemplated such a radical action, the wind is out of the sails. After all, they could revolt, but the situation is not that serious. Maybe we'll just hold fire. City B goes back to their homes, satisfied that they have exercised a freedom, living quietly with tyranny. The government and its backers are sitting pretty.

American faux revolutionaries are effectively quislings for the government they think they are protecting us from.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Castro, bi-otch.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[fatphil]

I'm sure the Singing Revolution/Baltic Way would like their recognition too.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[cusco]

The reason for the Second Amendment, and the reason why it doesn't specify what types of weapons, were because at that time the 'town hall cannon' wasn't just a decoration. Port cities owned cannon batteries to protect against pirates and Spaniards, rural villages and frontier outposts had cannon and mortars to be used in the case of attack by brigands or Indians, and many merchant ships were better armed than most naval vessels. It wasn't until the tail end of the 19th century that bands of marauders were finally no longer a part of the life of rural America, my own great-great-grandparents in northern Michigan had to be prepared to protect their farms from the Strangist Mormons raiders.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Well, let us say, some President declares an emergency and suspends the constitution. Or there is a contested election and the incumbent is ruled to be defeated by the Supreme Court, but the incumbent refuses to give up office. That is the time you could legitimately argue the government has turned tyrannical.

You know very well I disagree with the Supreme Court and pejoratively call Scalia time travelling mind reader. I think he is totally wrong to hold the second amendment rights as personal rights of the individual, not the collective right of the government to avoid maintaining a standing army. But, no matter how strongly I believe this, it is his opinion that counts, that is binding, not mine.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[camperdave]

You're missing the point. The constitution is defended with the ballot box, not the ammo box. By the time you're defending the constitution with guns, you've already lost. At that point, it's time to revert to the Declaration of Independence "...whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Agripa]

Got anything more recent in the last two centuries? eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the constitution speaks of the duty of all citizens to uphold and defend the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. And it is not the opinion of a single public servant that counts. It is the constitution itself that counts.

The process is as follows:
Some branch of the government repeatedly acts unconstitutionally.
The people ask them nicely to stop it by means of a petition of redress.
The branch of the government disagrees.
The people forcibly remove the branch.
The people call an election to choose the new branch.
End of story.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

At the beginning you defend the constitution by the ballot box.
But it's important to keep in mind that a candidate who runs on an unconstitutional platform is an enemy of the constitution as defined by the constitution itself and all citizens have the duty to defend the constitution against them.
If the citizens themselves vote in an unconstitutional candidate who proceeds to enact unconstitutional laws it is then the duty of the remained of the citizens who still hold true to present the candidate with a petition for redress as specified in the first amendment. It is also the duty of the other remaining constitutional branches of the government to provide adequate punishment to those enemies of the constitution who voted for an unconstitutional candidate.
Only if the unconstitutional candidate refuses to step down and does not repeal the unconstitutional laws enacted after the citizens have petitioned him/her for redress under the first amendment. Only then do they have the duty to forcibly remove him.
THEN they vote in a new constitutional candidate.

THAT is the way it is supposed to work.

Re:Cause and effect reversed.

[Anonymous Coward]

You won't protect shit. You'll eat a bullet. As sad as it might be, when the only power you have is talking about things, you get dictated to by anybody who hold the power to put a piece of high-velocity lead into your guts. The world will never be the peaceful paradise you want to live in. Only the threat of force keeps those who would use force against you at bay.

Shed size?

[Quila]

If these things come down to smaller CNC size, anyone could stick it in the back of a box truck with a generator on top and make guns anywhere.

Fundamental problem

[rasmusbr]

"...looks like we're getting closer to the RepRap being able to print all of its parts."

Sure, assuming it can print an Millermatic 140 arc welder and an Arduino.

Look, nature has already solved this problem, so we know something about the complexity and difficulty involved. We have cows that print milk and copies of themselves, chickens than print eggs and copies of themselves, grass that prints grain and copies of itself, etc. These things consists of millions of cells, each about as intelligent as an Arduino. Good luck creating something like that with a few hundred parts!

Re:Fundamental problem

[ColdWetDog]

"A horse can make other horses, that is a trick that bulldozers haven't figured out yet."

          Heinlein

Re:Fundamental problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't you do it with 4? ACTG?

Re:Fundamental problem

[Anonymous Coward]

That's just for the design template. You need some 22 more* to actually build the thing.

*(alanine, aspartic acid, cysteine, glycine, etc, etc.)

Re:Fundamental problem

[Smidge204]

With a little finagling, you can print serviceable PCBs and functional transistors using the same basic machine. Not in any real quality of course, but "it technically works" proof of concept stuff so far.

But after a certain point, you're no longer printing parts but just commodity items. For example, there's no point in printing nails for a wooden frame because nails are literally cheaper than a dime a dozen to begin with.
=Smidge=

Re:Fundamental problem

[Anonymous Coward]

But after a certain point, you're no longer printing parts but just commodity items. For example, there's no point in printing nails for a wooden frame because nails are literally cheaper than a dime a dozen to begin with.

The technology is probably a best-fit for a place with limited access to commodities and endless raw materials, such as a metallic asteroid, or the middle of a junkyard in a post-apocalyptic earth.

I long for the day when stories about 3D printers

[mark_reh]

do generate more comments about guns than anything else. But I guess other uses are not "newsworthy". We are all idiots and we deserve the government and laws we refuse to do anything about. 30k dead per year is nothing compared to the value of our freedom to kill 30k per year. Yay! We win!

Side Show and a Game Changer

[sycodon]

With this technology, guns will be a side show. Yes, people will make them and there will be much bloviation about that, but the real impact will be on local economies.

Open any phone book or Google for any city, "machine shop"; there will be hundreds. They are the foundation of any kind of manufacturing economy. My company deals with at least 20 different shops, parceling out work to meet shipping deadlines and lower costs. When this technology matures to the point where it is as ubiquitous as a CNC mill or lathe, you will see turn around times crash and labor shift from skilled machinists to skilled CAD engineers (good or bad...you decide). It's conceivable that the actual making of a part becomes almost a lights out operation.

Hang on to your hats, this will be a game changer in the world economy.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[iamgnat]

I don't think that's really true, at least not in the near term.

Years ago I had something simple made out of steel at a local machine shop and it cost be a bloody fortune for something simple. That's the kind of stuff this will be replacing for the near term. The one off relatively simple things is where something like this printer comes into play and (good) machine shops don't live off of that type of work. What you are talking about is the higher volume and higher skill machining and that will not be replaced anytime soon by a ~$1500 machine. Hell it already hasn't been replaced by the $300,000 machines. Just look at the RepRap itself. We've had that for a few years now and I remember some of the same claims about plastic items, but people still buy all kinds of plastic crap because it can be made quicker, cheaper, and better by the places that specialize in it.

Besides all that, are your ready to trust a DIY printer to build you the barrel of a gun, a new head for your engine, or any other item that has to deal with high stress loads? If so, please stay away from me when you use them

Over time the technology will improve (assuming IP law doesn't get in the way) and of course there will come a time when there is a shift away from manual labor (as is the case with all technology), but my point is that even those machinists that are starting their apprenticeships now don't need to give it up and go learn CAD as there is going to be plenty of work for them for quite some time yet.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly...guns are precision machines that must be made to very high tolerances out of quality materials so that they don't...you know...blow up in your face.

If 3D printed metal components compare to machined forgints as much as 3D printed resin compares to my kids' Legos, I'm guessing it won't be used in firearms anytime soon.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[bored_engineer]

This won't replace a machine shop. It uses a MIG welder as an extruder, so precise tolerances aren't what this machine is for. Hackaday featured this yesterday, and they have a picture on the front page that may have come from an academic journal.

It might complement other equipment in a machine shop, though. It's also interesting to realize that this may work with other metals.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[occasional_dabbler]

I work in aerospace, where I can't see this technology being used anywhere other than prototyping in decades. The cost of a part has very little to do with 'making' it. The value is in the design, the materials, the quality control and traceability and the qualification testing. The other big industries (Automotive, Oil...) have similarly regulated practices and, although they may adopt this a little sooner, it's still decades away.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[garyebickford]

Jet engine makers have made and tested (successfully) titanium turbine blades using additive manufacturing. Tolerances for those blades is on the order of 0.0001". I assume there must be some final fitting and polishing but they're not talking. And NASA funded a project that successfully built and tested a small rocket motor. The rocket motor was made in one piece, replacing a fabricated item that had many pieces. The time and cost to make it were both less than 10% of the old method.

IOW, companies are presently builing 3D printed parts and systems that are as good or better than equivalent high-precision parts.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[garyebickford]

I forget which company, but one of the jet engine companies has built and successfully tested turbine blades in an operating jet engine. IDK how much post-processing was required. And NASA funded making and testing a successful 3D printed rocket motor, which cost 1/10 as much as the original design and took 1/10 as long to make. It was made in one piece instead of fabricated from numerous components that had to be welded together. Welds, voids and impurities are the most common causes of failure in both systems and 3D printing is _potentially_ an answer to all of those failure points. So I would say (especially seeing the progress in just the last year or two) that your time scale is off by an order of magnitude.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[cusco]

Even if it can only be used in prototyping that's still a big deal. Having a tool and die maker spend a week on converting a drawing into a one-off sample of something is expensive, time-consuming and error-prone. When the design engineers can send the thing directly to a printer and see almost immediately that Tab A really won't fit into Slot B the time saved and improvement in quality and process will be enormous.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[occasional_dabbler]

Did you mean this? This is a long long way from the printer in TFA.

Naturally, NASA isn't using just any 3D printer to pull this off. It hired Austin, Texas–based Directed Manufacturing to fabricate the injector using a printer that employs selective laser melting to fuse layer after layer of nickel-chromium alloy. Such additive metal-based printers cost tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Of course there is a place for such technology, especially in rapid prototyping, but you are NOT going to get commercial aeroplane turbine blades made like this in your or my lifetimes, not until you can 3D print a single metallic crystal.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[wiredlogic]

It takes hours to make the smallest of parts with 3D printers. Machinists will not be put out by this any more than CNC did. When it matures it will be a useful technique to use for complex shapes in low production volume and creating tooling for conventional manufacturing.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[occasional_dabbler]

I am one. I do this. It's a tiny fucking deal because the cost of a failed experiment is still in the millions and beleive me, the guy making the tool die makes a thousand times fewer errors than any engineer younger than fifty does in his CAD. You do not work in my industry, obviously.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[cusco]

No, I don't work in your industry, but have dealt with a multitude of issues from CAD "engineers" in my own work (security systems). I apparently didn't make the point that I wanted, sorry. What I mean is that when the CAD guy can send his design to the printer and see a few minutes later "Oh, crap, that won't work" he's not wasting YOUR time building something wrong, and then building it again correctly (maybe). In my job I can't remember how many times we've been sent to do a job with designs that won't work, and which we can't convince Engineering that it won't work, and have to cobble together our own solution in the field and then convince them to update their drawings. I doubt my field is alone in that sort of experience.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[real gumby]

I think the key is the word "printer". Look what happened with printing. "Printer" used to be the name of a job (as was "computer") and being a printer was a respectable and valuable trade. Computer printers used to be terrible chain or belt devices. Later they were replaced by the cheaper and about as bad dot matrix systems. But over time they improved, until now the print shops that all big companies and government departments had down in the basement are gone. The printing businesses downtown are mostly gone -- the few that stay in business do specialized tasks.

Cheap, ubiquitous assembly will become common, just as cheap word processing became common. And like word processing I expect more custom and on-demand parts -- perhaps to start just phone cases and replacement parts for that umbrella (the 3D equivalent of early Word Perfect documents with lots of italics). But soon enough we'll print out plenty of stuff that we today would buy, if it is even available, just as we generate all sorts of documents.

And just as with printing, where we print less and less, perhaps we'll use less and less when we can fix or reuse things instead of throwing them all away.

(and to think I used to consider "3D printer" a terminological overreach...at least I can learn from the past)

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[rwiggers]

I wouldn't count on it taking any job from a CNC machine. it's a MIG welding machine and it's resolution/accuracy should be well over 1mm. It won't deal with a lot of metal also.
No, it's not the one size fits all.
It's very useful and interesting, allowing complex geometries more easily and I think local shops will have one once the techs (his and other techs for metal 3D printing) are mature.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[occasional_dabbler]

Yes, I agree entirely. This is what I meant by 'prototyping.' and it is very useful for this. On one project we were retrofitting a new system to address a changed regulation requiring the fuel tanks to be purged with 'inert' (low O2) air. We printed the unit so we could see how it could be 'threaded' through all the existing systems in the place we'd picked to install it. On new designs you can design everything together using digital mock-up but for this niche case, a physical object was much easier to deal with. Sorry for my rather strident tone in the previous post...

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[occasional_dabbler]

I was reminded today of a far more likely avenue for 3D printing - Medecine. Since people rarely fit to a common blueprint, there is already a market for tailored body replacement parts - cartilege, structures for plastic surgery, or replacement teeth for example.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[ChoosyBeggar]

Jet engine makers have made and tested (successfully) titanium turbine blades using additive manufacturing. Tolerances for those blades is on the order of 0.0001". I assume there must be some final fitting and polishing but they're not talking...

Which jet engine maker? 0.0001"? Really? No, seriously, really?? Show me anyone who's *printing* parts of higher quality than a skilled CNC machinist. I'd love to see it!

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[ncc74656]

Jet engine makers have made and tested (successfully) titanium turbine blades using additive manufacturing.

Which jet engine maker? 0.0001"? Really? No, seriously, really?? Show me anyone who's *printing* parts of higher quality than a skilled CNC machinist. I'd love to see it!

They're not turbine blades, but GE is already printing fuel nozzles. Rolls-Royce is also looking at doing the same. Maybe the OP got his parts mixed up.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[Anonymous Coward]

The loss of machine shops won't happen that fast, until you can sort out tempering and other functions to make the parts strong. A wrench made with little dots of metal is not going to be strong. If you're talking pistons or similar they won't last minutes in an engine. You have milling and tempering and annealling and forging, any number of other operations that affect the useful characteristics of metal that cannot be done by a 3d printer. All you can make is something that *looks* like its useful.

Re:Side Show and a Game Changer

[Anonymous Coward]

but my point is that even those machinists that are starting their apprenticeships now don't need to give it up and go learn CAD as there is going to be plenty of work for them for quite some time yet.

I am an apprentice machinist. We learn CAD as part of our standard curriculum.

To be able to machine something accurately, you need to be able to interpret engineering specifications, and in this age that means CAD. Also for those $300k CNC machines (we learn to use those too), you still need a skilled machinist to program them (DMLS and EBM, maybe not), as it's not nearly as simple as taking the CAD design and clicking go. The definition of the shape of a part is not the same as the procedure for cutting it, and even the best autoplan software is not as good as a trained machinist at designing toolpaths or calculating speeds and feeds.

Umm, just get a welder.

[nbritton]

Isn't an affordable 3D metal printer simply a welder attached to an x, y, z axis table? With a welder you can control the bead size by simply adjusting the feed rate and current. What is the issue here? Just get a mig welder, disassemble and attach it to a robot, then enclose the whole thing in a box filled with inert gas.

Re:Umm, just get a welder.

[serviscope_minor]

Just get a mig welder, disassemble and attach it to a robot, then enclose the whole thing in a box filled with inert gas.

And then write the control software etc...

This is basically what they've done. And they're giving you the plans so you can do it more easily.

Re:Umm, just get a welder.

[Anonymous Coward]

i can't imagine 0.025 wire is going to make very nice models.

i wonder if a mig or other wire-feed-with-arc process would scale down?

 

Re:I long for the day when stories about 3D printe

[Big Hairy Ian]

But I guess other uses are not "newsworthy".

Prints a "Michael Jackson Pacifier!"

3D metal printer, self assembling

[the eric conspiracy]

Well, I'm not going to worry until it's capable of scavenging the raw materials to build copies of itself.

That could get a bit dicey.

cf "The Mechanical Mice" by Eric Frank Russell

"that can be built" -- with a T

[Anonymous Coward]

"Build" does not substitute for "built."