Slashdot Mirror


Smartphone-Enabled Replicators Are 3-5 Years Away, Caltech Professor Says

merbs writes: In just a few years, we could see the mass proliferation of DIY, smartphone-enabled replicators. At least, Caltech electrical engineering professor Ali Hajimiri and his team of researchers thinks so. They've developed a very tiny, very powerful 3D imager that can easily fit in a mobile device, successfully tested its prowess, and published the high-res results (PDF) in the journal Optics. Hajimiri claims the imager may soon allow consumers to snap a photo of just about anything, and then, with a good enough 3D printer, use it to create a real-life replica "accurate to within microns of the original object."

17 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Oh wonderful... by houstonbofh · · Score: 3, Funny

    And you thought dick pics were a problem...

  2. Let's fix that headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bad headline: "Smartphone-Enabled Replicators Are 3-5 Years Away, Caltech Professor Says"

    Good headline: "Smartphone-Enabled 3-D Scanners Are 3-5 Years Away, Caltech Professor Says"

  3. What is possible vs. what is useful by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is a replicator sensor on a phone really that useful? A camera is nice to have around all the time and even that often isn't used much by many phone owners. Yes, this thing is small but space is at a premium on phones. How often do you look at something and say "I wish I could create a mediocre quality 3D printed version of this"?

    I don't see it as a mainstream feature. Maybe an option. Maybe useful for measuring things.

    1. Re:What is possible vs. what is useful by ThePackager · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps it only peripherally relates, but... I'm interested in the team that recycles all these damn plastic wrappers, bags, bottles and endless polymer stuff into usable 3D printer raw material. Now let's se THAT breakthrough!

      --
      Please have respect for people with different abilities, especially children.
    2. Re:What is possible vs. what is useful by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      we all know how the Internet turned out to be useless...

      Give it a few years and the marketing companies, spammers, black hat hackers and governments will finish the job.

    3. Re:What is possible vs. what is useful by Rei · · Score: 2

      Welding services do metal just fine (actually, more than "fine", I'd say "superbly"). I designed and printed out a detailed brass medallion as a gift before and it came out just beautiful. Most services these days just use lost wax casting, but there's also metal sintering, and the newest player is thermal spraying, such as laser spraying.

      --
      Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
  4. Half-right, maybe... by neminem · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I *can* imagine the possibility that within 5 years, we'd have portable enough 3d imagers and powerful enough phones to both stick the hardware in a phone-sized device and have a phone-sized device run the required software. I have no real understanding of how the physics of that would really work, granted, but it doesn't seem totally outside the bounds of possibility.

    But that's just the input. I *can't* really imagine the possibility that within 5 years, we'd have powerful enough *printers* to take the output of such a precise scanner, and recreate it anywhere near so precise, even if you're only talking about an object made entirely out of one or two kinds of plastic, which is unlikely to be the sort of object people would really want to "replicate". "Just about anything"? Yeah right.

    Wake me up when we can replicate food, say, and have it taste the same as the original. Will we see that in my lifetime? Maybe, if I'm lucky. Will we see that in 3-5 years? I'd bet quite a lot of money on "no", and I'm not a betting sort of person.

    1. Re:Half-right, maybe... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      I, for one, welcome our brave, new, micron-accurate D&D action figure and spork overlords.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  5. Hm... by roc97007 · · Score: 2

    Might be time for a remake of Weird Science.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  6. 3D Printing, still not very useful by Moof123 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Great, you can scan something and then print it in crappy plastic. Big whoop.

    Seriously, 3D printing has been around for a while now, and I am still waiting to see anything beyond the Gee-Whiz level of cool or useful. You can only make so many money clips, pencil holders, and miniature busts before it becomes clear it is just a toy. Industrial ones that can print in metal are a different story, but the crappy plastic extruders are never going to take over the world or replace China's factories.

    1. Re:3D Printing, still not very useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Might look into some of the exotic filaments that have been coming out - flexibles, thermochrome, brass/stainless/copper/iron fills, glow in the dark, woodfilll, bamboo, nylon, etc. Even the metal sintering 3d printers are starting to hit consumer level prices.

    2. Re:3D Printing, still not very useful by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      Probably not. Unless your needs run to Star Wars figurines, plastic spoons or other objects made primarily out of a single material, the next couple of generation printers are going to be pretty unrewarding. If you a running a prototyping shop and need an object that is going to be part of another object, you might find that one of the many fabrication shops already in existence can help you create the object of your desires. It might be CNC milled, it might be printed via laser sintering, it might be created using another technique - but these services exist.

      3D printing is a long ways away from creating complicated, useful objects that have a broad enough appeal to justify production of the thingy-bob on every other street corner. Star Trek type replicator? We're not even talking the same universe here.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:3D Printing, still not very useful by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      People don't deny that having a machine that does rapid prototyping is a good idea, it's the extrapolation of current capabilities into "in five years time you'll be able to scan a Ferrari on your smartphone and print out an exact copy" that gets annoying.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  7. Re:I would have to assume... by slew · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that the "accurate within microns" part is only applicable if you feed it some scaling information.

    Otherwise, it's going to only be as accurate as the person guessing the size of the original.

    AFAICT, the technique used by this imager is FMCW (frequency modulated continuous wave) which basically give you a very accurate time-of-flight measurement. In this type of system, the received optical frequency difference from the transmitted frequency is measured by optical-coherent mixing and sensing the resultant beat signal frequency. Apparently this groups contribution to this technique is to measure both the phase and amplitude of this beat signal digitally so multiple algorithms can be deployed to analyze the beat signal.

    In any case, given a very accurate distance to an object, the solid angle projection to the imaged object, and some basic optical system calibration data, it is presumably fairly straightforward compute the actual size of the object w/o guessing.

  8. Physical keys. by stonefoz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Today, anyone with some determination and a few photographs can replicate keys. How soon will it be till the average criminal has access to an instant key duplicator? A high quality scanner could mark the end of even the top rated physical keys.

    --
    I think I just cashed out all my cool points.
    1. Re:Physical keys. by stonefoz · · Score: 2

      There are better arguments against fingerprint locks. They can't be changed even when they need to be. If more than one place is using a fingerprint, they have all the keys.

      --
      I think I just cashed out all my cool points.
  9. What did he predict 5 years ago? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

    Before we get too far with this thing, what has this guy predicted 5 years ago? How did that turn out? Without some calibration there is no reason to pay attention to his predictions more than the predictions of Satguru Somereallylongnameanandaswami.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact