
3D Printing Revolution: The Complex Reality - jrockway
http://blog.makezine.com/2013/02/14/3d-printing-revolution-the-complex-reality/
======
ph0rque
I have a bit of a quibble with this point: "CAD is genuinely difficult." When
I was in the university and had access to SolidWorks, it took me less than ten
hours to design something that was moderately complex. Eight years later, when
I tried to design something for my side project using cheap and free 3D CAD
programs, I had the hardest time doing so because the programs I tried were
simply not powerful enough. The problem is not the CAD concept, it's the
programs. There's no reason why CAD can't be easier than ever, and it might be
if you purchase a multi-thousand dollar program.

~~~
angersock
Honestly, my concern is that something like the GIMP will take over in the
open-source CAD space, and stymy efforts for making something as useful and
powerful as Solidworks. We've seen this happen before--let's try to avoid it.

~~~
nickpinkston
There is: FreeCAD, based on the OpenCASCADE kernel.

SolidWorks is just so easy to pirate, that no one has much motivation. It's a
massive effort to build something like this.

Also, it requires a multi-disciplinary team: math, programming, MechE / ID,
UX, etc. - it'd be hard for an open source project to do this without some
type of funded entity.

~~~
zanny
Hey, FreeCAD allows python scripting, I'm game. *

*: got about 30 minutes into trying it a couple times before banging my head on a wall, goes back and plays with Blender.

~~~
nickpinkston
You can try OpenSCAD - but it's its own 3D language, but pretty intuitive.

------
ChuckMcM
Nice article, the bit about casting is pretty spot on. If you want to make a
number of things currently casting is a lot more efficient. Which is not to
say you can't 3D print an exemplar, use that to make a mold, and then cast
copies, very doable, But just that then you're making parts with casting resin
not 3D printing.

I really like my Replicator but have yet to do anything significant with it
(which makes me sad, so many projects so little time).

I can say this though as more of this stuff gets going (see the article I
submitted on printing in metal
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5220032)>) the difference between the
RepRap and the Cupcake printer, the Cupcake and the Replicator, things are
progressing along nicely. People joked about my my 2K of RAM in my Digital
Group z80 system but 10 years after that point in time enterprise business was
using PC's in their day to day operations.

Guess I'm mostly saying "Patience, its coming along nicely."

~~~
f-
That's true to some extent, although it's useful to keep two things in mind:

1) The improvements in the output of FDM printers is in good part due to
switching to lower-strength materials (e.g., ABS -> PLA). It's great news if
you want to make casting molds - but not so great if you want to directly
fabricate durable parts.

2) There is no gradual progression from the familiar FDM extruders to SLS,
SLA, and similar technologies that produce high-accuracy parts or can work in
metals. These technologies are inherently messy and have other surprising
trade-offs, and are suited chiefly for very dedicated hobbyists and for quasi-
industrial applications.

~~~
ericb
1) Not true. The resolution and printed parts in ABS and PLA are essentially
identical. The only reason you see a switch from ABS is that PLA doesn't
require a heated build bed and companies like Makerbot are trying to simplify
things to make them cheaper and more plug and play for mom and pop.

2) Why does there need to be a progression from FDM to SLS and SLA? The
progression is there on the software side with things like slicing, 3d
modeling, etc. There isn't a progression from inkjet to laser printers, but
that didn't stop anything.

------
rprospero
I'm going to need to save this article for the next time I get into an
argument about 3D printing. Like the author, I love the technology and have
enjoyed the parts that I've made with it. However, the technology is over-
hyped and often treated like a Star Trek replicator. I've seen discussions of
3D printing nuclear food, microprocessors, and even living things.

To a degree the technology reminds me of Visual Basic. The technology makes it
very easy to make something that looks like what you want, but it doesn't
bring you any closer to actually making what you wanted.

~~~
jacquesm
Visual Basic earned large numbers of people large amounts of money and allowed
them to make _exactly_ what they wanted. Specifically, what they wanted was a
solution, quickly that they could cobble together themselves without having to
hire some person that would tell them all the time how what they wanted was
not possible.

~~~
rprospero
Ah, I hadn't meant to denigrate Visual Basic, though I can see how my comment
could be taken that way.

My reference to Visual Basic rather comes from a large number of projects I
saw that equated the GUI with the functionality. For example, I played with am
"80% complete" program to translate between English and Latin texts. The New,
Open, Save, and Exit buttons were all working. As soon as someone wrote the
method for the Translate button, the program would be complete.

Visual Basic and 3D printing have both given thousands of people the
opportunity to do things quickly and independently that they'd have never had
the opportunity to try before. However, they've both also suffered the hype of
those who assumed that their understanding of the surface was an understanding
of the whole.

------
WestCoastJustin
If you haven't already seen Michal Zalewski's "Guerrilla guide to CNC
machining, mold making, and resin casting" [1] check it out!! He talks about
how to design and make the molds from scratch. There is also the "The making
of Omnibot mkII (work in progress)" [2] listed in the article.

[1] <http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/gcnc/>

[2] <http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/omni2/>

~~~
Wingman4l7
The "manufacturing things entirely using software" dream died a little for me
after I looked at this guide _(which is excellent and clearly a labor of love,
BTW)_. The amount of variables in meatspace that you have to account for (that
I simply had no clue about) -- like total indicated runout, reach length, cut
direction -- was mind-boggling.

~~~
kragen
To me, those variables sound like things that software can do a much better
job of dealing with than people can.

~~~
nexox
When you've got thousands of dollars worth of tools at risk, you don't let
software guess what to do - you can program most machine tools to damage
themselves without a complaint. Software can help, but suggesting that a
computer can produce a flawless CAM program for a CNC tool is like suggesting
that computers should write web browsers or filesystems.

CAM programming is an art, and it requires intimate knowledge of the machine
you're coding for if you hope to get a final product without too many trial
and error iterations.

~~~
kragen
Your reasoning seems to be, "Since poor G-code can waste a lot of billets or
even produce a hundred-thousand-dollar CRUNCH, we should write it by hand
instead of generating it using computer software." That sounds exactly
backwards to me.

(Computers _do_ write web browsers and filesystems; the programs that do this
are called "compilers".)

------
stephengillie
We won't all be designing things. There will be a few people whose designs are
widely used because they work the best.

We'll all be trading and downloading and filesharing the CAD files. Think of
future banner ads: "Need a new plate? Go browse the 10 million CAD files on
3d-CAD-plates.com to download the floral plates of your dreams!"

Torrent networks and TOR will be used for the underground and black-market
filesharing of CAD files for restricted objects, such as gun parts and other
weapons.

~~~
Retric
In the past 10 years the only thing I bought that any current 3D printer could
have made was plates and silverware. IMO, that says a lot more about the the
real state of 3D printing than anything I have read online.

~~~
mercuryrising
I wouldn't use plates or silverware that I printed on my 3D printer unless I
coated it.

Do you have one? I couldn't think of that many things to print when I made
one, but now that I have one (kind of like the hammer and the nail), I can see
lots of things to print now.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Relevant observation: "hammer and nail" effect seems to be the same thing as
pg's Blub paradox[0] or the phenomenon that when you start carrying Duct Tape
with you, you'll suddenly find some use for it every other day.

Because of that I think we should learn not to dismiss things just because we
can't imagine what we can do with them. The imagination will most likely come
with use of the tool.

[0] -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(computer_programme...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_\(computer_programmer\)#Blub)

~~~
stephengillie
Humans learn by playing

------
BigBlueSaw
I every conversation I've had lately when I tell people what I do, they
mention 3D printing. I have to gently tell people that I don't do 3D printing
yet as products generally fall into one of two categories: 1\. Inexpensive and
low quality. 2\. Expensive and high quality.

My current plan is to go after market #2 in a year or two when I can raise the
capital to get a really good machine.

I started with, and plan to continue, waterjet and laser cutting as the
limitations of these technologies are easy for most designers to understand.
What you enter as a CAD file is pretty much exactly what you get out as a
final piece.

As an aside, it's amazing that using a robot to blast away raw material into a
finished part using an ultra high pressure stream of water and garnet or a
frikken laser beam is considered "traditional" machining.

~~~
nickpinkston
What are you thinking with 3DP? Don't try to be Shapeways, et al. who compete
on price and make no money...

~~~
BigBlueSaw
You are very wise.

I want to do DMLS or another technology that will make metal parts.

I haven't heard from you guys in a while. Shoot me an e-mail.

~~~
nickpinkston
Just hit me up at: nickpinkston at gmail.

------
vitno
I always get excited about 3d printing. Then I remember how much 2d printing
sucks.

~~~
phurley
Really?

Maybe I am just old and remember using manual typewriters, line printers, dot
matrix. Now when I get amazingly crisp nearly instant typeset output from just
about everything in seconds I am still amazed.

~~~
vitno
m-m-manual?! :P no, I admit it, I'm a young. Printers jam a lot, they have ink
problems, drivers are always a pain. They are probably a lot better than a
typewriter though.

------
guizzy
It's true that the mainstream media has been overhyping this technology, and
some of the mainstream tech media as well (Wired, for instance). From the way
everything becomes "3D printing" in the news, you'd think that a 500$ reprap
is a few years away from being able to print human organs, cars and houses.
Some journalists need a reality check: hobby and consumer 3D printers are able
to make simple plastic pieces with some caveats about overhangs. They only
recently started appearing with dual extruders. They're still very fussy
machines that need frequent adjustment. And those that don't are either very
expensive or very limited in capabilities.

On the other hand, there are very legitimate uses for these as they are right
now. I guess it's hard to get excited about replacing a broken plastic handle
on a beach cooler or a broken knob on a washing machine, but you can make cool
stuff with them. I printed a docking station for my Nexus 7 with mine.

------
nazgulnarsil
Okay, so you extrapolate a gloomy future from a snapshot of the tech? I
remember dozens of such articles from the early days of the web.

Subtractive processes have advantages? It's pretty obvious that at some point
these devices will be able to run additive and subtractive process in whatever
sequence you like.

This stuff is so complex that only a few currently understand robust design?
All the better to hatch a million designers in garages all over the world.

------
forgottenpaswrd
The complex reality is that price is not there yet for CNC(including tooling)
and lasers.

The Roland of the article cost more than 3 thousands dollars. I could make
eight Prusa reprap (I did it for a University course) for this price, or buy
printrbots.

About CAD: For some people it is genuinely easy, like some kids are "naturals"
for playing basketball.

When you teach kids, it blows your mind what they are capable of doing when
left alone once they learned the basics.

~~~
learc83
>The Roland of the article cost more than 3 thousands dollars. I could make
eight Prusa reprap (I did it for a University course) for this price

Yeah, or you could make a small 3 axis CNC for $400 as well.

------
tbenst
Some rebuttals:

1) CAD is genuinely difficult

True, but this barrier is lowering rapidly. Anyone can make simple items using
programs like Autodesk 123D with no training. Low-cost 3D scanners will also
lower this barrier (see projects like
[http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/621838643/desktop-3d-sca...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/621838643/desktop-3d-scanner?ref=category)).

2) There is a lot more to industrial design than meets the eye

Good design is hard, and the supply of designers is very limited. But most of
the population has no reason to learn 3D design. Providing fiscal incentives
to designers of novel products is crucial for expanding this base. More
importantly, empowering more people to have ideas translated into physical
objects will greatly increase the supply of casual designers. Have you ever
shown a friend an object that you designed and 3D printed? It's magical in a
way that photoshop is not. Don't underestimate the in-person viral factor for
inspiring designers!

3) Mechanical engineering is a real science

As in open-source software, 3D designs often build off of each other. Both in
terms of remixing existing designs, as well as sharing printing profiles for
different slicers. The 3D printing community is much more collaborative than
traditional manufacturing institutions. Software in 3D printing is 'eating'
the mechanical engineering world slowly but surely: no longer do you need
massive amounts of capital to design and start selling a new product. The
barrier to entry for product designers has lowered!

4) Manufacturing processes are not perfect – and won’t be any time soon

Hence the need for curation and an easy way to find quality designers and
printers....

------
kragen
In June I wrote a bit about this:

"When automated fabrication—the scenario where you get your next bicycle by
downloading bicycle blueprints over the network and sending them to a machine
that then produces a bicycle for you without human intervention—happens, it
will not be by means of 3-D printers, which work by depositing layers of a
small number of materials. Instead, it will take the form of automated
assembly by robots of parts mostly made by other means, such as laser cutting,
torch cutting, CNC machining, and planar printing processes."

I posted that on [http://lists.canonical.org/pipermail/kragen-
tol/2012-June/00...](http://lists.canonical.org/pipermail/kragen-
tol/2012-June/000957.html). What do you think? Is that correct?

------
toddnessa
This is something that has hit my consciousness only recently as a result of
the gun debate (3-d printers are being used to manufacture magazines). Since
then I have checked out some uses for it on YouTube and have seen everything
it used to manufacture model airplanes that fly to hand-grenades (yikes!). I
have already been pricing out units myself and would like to purchase one of
these one day in the not-so-distant future. The change that this technology
will bring to so many individuals around the world is nothing short of
revolutionary. I believe that it will really impact our society over the next
decade in ways we would not even realize yet- kind of like the Internet did in
the 1990's.

------
tachyonbeam
I think that when everyone is pointing to a technology as "the future", that's
a sign it might not be, at least not the way they imagine it. If 3D printing
is so great, where are the huge revolutionary changes? 3D printers have been
around for several years. What are we waiting for, exactly?

~~~
leoedin
There is a lot of work going on to develop 3D printing as a mass manufacturing
process. It is improving rapidly, but you have to understand that in the
physical world progress is always slower than in software. 3D printing isn't a
small change in manufacturing process (like more advanced CNC machining is)
but a completely different approach. The level of investment, testing and
iterating required to produce 3D printed components which demonstrate proven
reliability and lower costs than existing processes is high.

The aerospace industry are actively pursuing 3D printing as a manufacturing
process. Selective laser sintering allows shape-optimised parts to be built
out of titanium - something that we cannot do any other way - which will lead
to upwards of 50% weight savings. It will make a huge difference in the weight
(and so efficiency) of aircraft. The issue is that the aerospace industry
operates on the principal of proven heritage. The 787 may be the newest large
airliner, but there's nothing in it that we haven't been using elsewhere for
20 years. Space is even slower at adopting new technologies - reliability is
key.

------
wasdman
On March 15-17, in Elkhart Indiana is the Midwest Reprap Featival. Josef
Prusa, of Prusa Mendel fame will be there.

The festival is free to attend, no tickets or anything. If you are a vendor,
they ask a small donation.

------
apapli
Business idea: CAD object library inspired by Lego.

Imagine being able to build your model from components in software, then print
out the parts and put it together.

~~~
hugs
That's what I'm doing with my open-source Bitbeam project. I design the Lego
Technic-compatible parts in OpenSCAD. Then the parts are lasercut, milled, or
3d printed. I've shipped several Bitbeam-based robots via Tindie already, and
I'm looking to expand my part and kit catalog. Want to help? :-) (Bitbeam.org)

------
stonewhite
The problem with 3D printers is that, it is not a profitable market at all,
hence not a single mainstream vendor would apply it commercially.

With a full fledged 3D printer, you can essentially print another 3D printer.
Just like how everyone uses windows, a large sum of potential customers would
be freeloading. The exception would be that, they wouldn't have a huge market
that would keep the cash flowing. Heck, electric cars weren't commercial until
someone found a better way to monetize it else than charging it only for the
electric bill.

The current technology and budgets for technology allows an affordable 3D
printer to be at your home. But it is specifically left out of plans. Think of
a blueprint for a pcb, chair or car that has been developed open source.
Unless they stranglehold all the resources needed you wouldn't have to rely on
any manufacturers or or middle men, which would start to drown the market.

We will see our first commercial 3D printers when they find a way to enforce a
solid(er) DRM on it. Until then, it will be a geek hobby and left esotheric.

