I'd really love to share the paper right now, but it's someone else's masters thesis that hasn't been released yet. If anyone is interested in it and can remember, ping me in a few months?
I'm not in that business, but I do deal with various safety concerns quite a bit. When faced with basic tools, the average person tends to have a terrifying combination of inventiveness and stupidity...
It seems that those 'max RPM' warnings on circular saw blades actually do have some relevance and the blade fragments embedded over 1" in the doorframe were proof that making a proper chop saw requires a motor with less RPM than a vacuum cleaner.
It's a miracle nobody died.
Probably the way to deal with this is to have an exhaust system which keeps the build chamber below atmospheric pressure. Exhaust through a water air filter. Water air filters work well on particles, but you have to keep dumping the dirty water and adding fresh water. They're not used much in HVAC or vacuum cleaners because they take a lot of blower power, but for a small 3D printer, where you're not moving much air, they should work.
This does not seem like a real solution, it only moves the problem somewhere else.
"The initial approach was to fabricate an acrylic hood that would be placed above the urinalysis workstations and would vent odors directly outside. However, city officials would not permit the laboratory to ventilate the captured air to the outdoors. This prompted Vantari and the IQAir team to focus on air filtration instead of ventilation."
It probably wouldn't be terrible idea to take a page from Beijing residents and keep an air filter around.
http://www.amazon.com/Honeywell-Long-Life-QuietCare-Purifier... works to 0.3um particle size.
Even better would be an actual fume hood if you're serious. They're a good idea if you like to solder stuff, too...
A HEPA filter will still do some good, though, and 0.3um is about as small as can reasonably be found on consumer-level filters.
Edit: From the article:
As you can see in the photos the 3D printer produced over
190,000 particles of varying sizes.
After the Model 300 pulled the particle-laden air through
its HEPA filter, the scanner detected 0 particles at the
unit’s air output.
Maybe a good insurance investment for the company with a room full of 3D printers... after they pay for the HVAC guy to come in and install some real exhaust ventilation duct work.
 E.G., http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/06/f1/doe-std-3020-2... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HEPA#Specifications
You are mostly correct. However, per your links, using "HEPA" with any prefix or suffix is problematically allowed. The specifications laid out by the DOE are mostly for DOE facilities and so they have their own version. Everyone else is using their own brand of "-HEPA-" which can mean <0.003 pm or not and is therefore misleading.
But I was surprised when I saw The Wirecutter review:
Korean machines seemed to perform as well as IQAir and BlueAir, and they are quite cheaper (and use more efficient engines). Any comments?
The IQAir machines don't need any maintenance other than buying new filters when it tells you to. If you are trying to save money, don't buy IQAir.
I try to evaluate effectiveness qualitatively and quantitatively. When I first got an air filter for my bedroom, I noticed that suddenly I didn't feel like coughing all night long. When I got the IQAir for my bedroom, I woke up the next morning with a sore throat because the back of my throat was totally dry. My chronic post-nasal drip was gone. It could have been my imagination, so I bought a laser particle counter to measure the particle count in my room. It was 0. (And it's counting the sub-micron particles.)
(There are some caveats. Moving around in bed is particle city, so you're not breathing 100%-fresh air all night. But the filters take care of things very quickly, and I run them on a high setting, and they're close to my bed. You'll need earplugs. Air filters on the "silent" setting do approximately nothing. This was not a problem for me because I've slept with earplugs for years due to annoying cats. Now I can't sleep without them, the sound of sheets moving against each other is annoying :)
When I first joined the company, I was told not to put it on full blast the first night otherwise your mouth will become dry. It still blows my mind that people experience that.
I keep mine on throughout the night as well, but I have definitely noticed the sound doesn't have the humming sound as opposed to other air purifiers. It is a much quieter, fan like sound.
Now I just need to buy a house so I can get a Perfect 16 installation and move the noisemaking equipment out of my bedroom.
So should we also be avoiding rooms where people are cooking?
But, in my experience, both kitchens and hobbyist 3d printers can produce piles of spaghetti very easily.
Oops, looks like I'm behind the times: http://www.3ders.org/articles/20150505-pasta-maker-barilla-t...
Personally, I would only use 3D printers in well ventilated areas. I would also not eat from 3D printed food utensils, even though some of the stuff people have designed look fabulous.
"Interestingly, the presence of an enclosure only moderately reduced UFP emission rates from the MakerBot–ABS combination, with a ∼35% reduction in the median emission rate (although this variation is within the estimate of uncertainty). Larger reductions were not observed, perhaps because the enclosure was not completely sealed and large gaps were visible. While these two comparisons provide preliminary data on how printed shape and presence of an enclosure may impact particle emissions from 3D printers, no other definitive conclusions can be drawn given this limited data set."
My father has a lung disease called IPF (terminal) which is scarring of the lungs it occurs over time from various particles. He was a blue collar worker exposed to various fine particles; sawdust, welding fumes, grinding metal, paint, probably some asbestos insulation etc. at his place work over the decades which caused small amounts of damage each year.
Lungs are not to be messed with they're so delicate and lung cancer isn't the worst fatal lung disease you can get.
i think it is a more promising technology than the more populace popular extruder fdm
i'd love to see the peachy(o) team run similar tests
Also, after "print-a-gun" plans released, nothing major happened. So I hope common sense will prevail.
If this is a hypothetical, please take this in the best possible way and bear in mind that you were downvoted, your comment is currently light-grey to me: personally just to me it sounds like you're preparing in advance to be in the wrong, i.e. you're preparing a moral and legal position for something that doesn't exist yet, nobody cares about 3D printed coprights ,but even though it doesn't exist yet you've already chosen the wrong side and have started to prepare snide, snark, and incorrect arguments so that you could defend being in the wrong - and that you can't wait to start being in the wrong. If this is the case, then you would be the troll in the conversation. It's just how I personally read your comment.
But before we get ahead of ourselves - is this a future argument (are you ahead of your time), or has it started to be an issue already? can you give references?
Sorry if I was hard in the middle paragraph, I've just literally never heard of a 3D printing copyright troll. I've just googled it and got some hypothetical articles from 2012.
My own perspective is that society has a choice between, on the one hand: (A) letting some designer put 5,000 hours of work into designing something intricate thing that grants people huge amounts of utility, it's a fanstatic achievement that costs you $0.27 in plastic to print at home and gives you real benefits - but they rae charging $4.99 on Steam for the privilege, while addressing some level of piracy; and (B) on the one hand, the status quo where you don't get the utility (let's value at it $80) from the $0.27 piece of plastic, because nobody has designed it for you.
It seems to me right now the status quo is (B). Obviously lots of great stuff could be made and 3d printed for pennies, that nobody has designed. Some guy designed a fully working tourbillon watch. (more like clock) Look at how he brazenly puts his name/logo on it http://hackaday.com/2016/01/11/3d-printed-tourbillon-clock/
Do you think he shouldn't have any level of copyright protection on these projects, if he wants it? Really?
I'm just kind of angry because you're showing a level of entitlement over something that doesn't even exist yet. people don't really get lots of benefit from 3d printing intricately designed works at home.
I realize you're shifting over to the technology side - what's your specific objection? And, is it a hypothetical? Or is this something that is actually happening?
Thanks for taking the time to respond to me. I just feel like you're arguing against a hypothetical that hasn't happened. It's like, you are creating a new non-existent debate just so you can be wrong about it. I realize this sounds extremely mean of me, but hopefully we can understand each other through this conversation. Thanks for your replies.
Consider the VCR as a historical example. It's illegal to use it to bootleg copyrighted movies, but legal to use it for your own materials. However, the copyright lobby tried to shut down VCR sales entirely, and this case made it all the way to the US Supreme Court before being decided in favor of VCRs.
I imagine some people are afraid that 3D printers might end up in a similar situation, perhaps with less favorable court rulings or legislators. Modern technology also opens up other options, such as requiring all 3D printers to include DRM technology.
I don't know how likely any of this is, but the worries don't seem completely out there.