3D Printer Update

It would be interesting to know how long one of those 5'' x 5" x 5" objects takes to turn out, because if it was fast enough, you'd have a whole new way of doing small run model kits. In fact, you could have programs for thousands of models on hand and turn them out on demand as they were ordered by customers. It would certainly be less labor-intensive and messy than resin models and RTV molds as far as production went, and if the program was detailed enough should be able to capture small details fairly well. On the other hand, creating the program to make something could be extremely time intensive by the time you get down to fine details like rivets, and might take longer than creating a master that would then be resin cast. Maybe one would make a master model by the usual means, then optically scan it into a program, rather than trying to do a detailed 3D rendering of it to create the program.

Pat

on 8/14/2007 4:00 PM Pat Flannery said the following:

I saw one of those things on a TV magazine show. After the computer did its thing with a statue graphic and sent it to the 3D printer, they dug out a 3D model of the computer image from a large box of , what looked like sand. The statue model was about a foot tall, and appeared to be a solid form of that sand.

I think you miss the point. Not kits. Models.

I think you're not thinking out of the box.

Builder makes several parts from the machine that comprise a kit.

eventually you'll put the object on a glass with 360 degree scan capability, hit copy and whoa-laa. i suspect there will be a computerized way to enter the specs and have the pc do it all. pc's can do vitually anything if you know how to program it. we are still a pre-scientific species. once we learn to think and ask correctly, you'll REALLY be impressed.

The version I saw used something that looked like a tank of liquid polyester resin that it solidified into the object.

Pat

jaf wrote:

But you'd still have to paint it... now assuming it was an aircraft, and they managed to place the whole cockpit into it during manufacture... you are really going to have some fun painting the inside through the cockpit opening (although I've done this in a few occasions) There's also the fact of that layer thickness of .01 inch they mention; that's not good enough to manufacture a really super-smooth surface, like is needed for a car body or a canopy, although it might work for a tank. If detail fidelity goes way up, you could still manufacture sub-assemblies via this method that would be glued together like a conventional resin kit. It seems to be a lot of trouble to go to to manufacture a limited edition model though unless you can assure yourself of fairly numerous sales. One of the smaller aircraft models I have is a 1/72 scale Ba-349 Natter rocket fighter; that's probably around 4-5 cubic inches of material, so actual material cost using this process would be $4 - $5, which is pretty reasonable; you could sell them for $10 each and make a profit. But consider the number of man-hours that would go into writing the program that the machine will use to make them to the level of detail of a injection-molded or resin cast kit, and the economics don't look as good unless you sell quite a few. On small things this may work, but as the size starts increasing, things don't look as good; a 1/72 scale B-17 is going to be around 50 cubic inches of material or more, so now cost is up to $50 just for materials. Once you go beyond that size things go completely off the deep end as far as material cost go due to the square/cube law in relation to size and volume goes... a hypothetical 1/32th scale B-17 now ends up costing several hundred dollars for materials alone even if it's all made very thin internally. There's also the problem of how you get the excess unsolidified forming production material out of the inside things of like the tires, where there is no obvious way for it to be poured out. That could get expensive fast, and drilling holes into the model to drain the unsolidified material out of it sort of defeats the purpose of making it in one piece. I don't think we'll see this being used in a large scale anytime soon for making models, as the technology doesn't seem to be a great leap over what we have when it comes to effort and production cost versus price. At best, it might be used for quite small models where someone sells you the files needed to allow your home replicator machine to make a model of something. But I think they are going to need to get their fidelity level up a order of magnitude to around .001 inch thickness per layer to make it competitive with injection molded or resin cast kits.

Pat

Told ya'll so...

I attended a demo class on a competitor's machine and it took about an hour to turn out a gang (five or six at a time) of little spiral shaped bottles...but the cool thing was that the bottles came off the tack board with screw-off lids...fully assembled. I've got one on my desk...

But you wouldn't really want to use something like this for production - as you point out, you'd use it to make durable masters...and pour resin for model part production.

Another interesting prototyping process I've seen around work uses compressed butcher paper and a laser - the resulting parts are somewhere between hardwood and plastic in appearance and texture. I've seen spheres (smooth spheres) cut inside cubic cages using this method. Very cheap materials, very precise, very fast...more expensive.

Uh...the future is NOW...

Stereo-lithography. Or lithotripty...

I've personally seen parts made on these machines polished and chromed and smooth as glass - it can be done. Whether it's done cheaply is the question...hence why you use these to produce rapid masters, and not for full production.

not bad, but when i put specs in and get a panther model 120 out, i'll be really impressed. even if it take a couple of days. of course i don't expect any acid in the battery or petrol products anywhere. wouldn't want to really complicate things.

Count DeMoney wrote: : The new Popular Mechanics did a spread on the item below. : Hard Corps Models is now doing that. They offer 1/35 Sherman vision port brush guards and LVT tracks.

Previously, the vision port brush guards were grossly out of scale if done in injection molds, or were flat if done with PE. I thought the container was empty initially, the 5 brush guards are VERY delicate.

The LVT tracks are very interesting, as the real verhicles had a wavy face for propulsion in the water. This is very difficult to reproduce with molds, either RTV or metal, as the wavy face was very thin. The main problem with the tracks is that they are $90.00 a set.

Bruce

I see it as a boon to scratch builders. Sure, with 0.01 step size the contour would need sanding. However, that may still be easier than sanding/finishing carved wood or urethane foam.

Yeah, it probably would NOT work for transparencies like canopies, where sanding a clear material doesn't work well. But do the canopy seperate- just use this device for non transparent parts that will be painted anyway.

I'm still waiting for laser cutting machines to get cheaper. I'd like to have one, but not a current prices. I am very skeptical about the

On the other hand, I would like to see the availability of services where you'd send the CAD files, and have companies do custom photo etch, laser cutting, and these 3D printing things. I understand there ARE such services available for PE and laser cutting, but they do not seem to advertise in the scale modeling magazines, so I have no idea what the services cost, or how to contact them.

Doink! For now that's the only cost effective method.

They're out there, look under etchers and circuit board manufacturers. Plan on paying true industrial prices. That's where most resin kit makers and PE makers get their etching done.