I told ya so...

The layer thickness or pixelation is "only" .005 - .010 inches. . . about enough to make a OEZ kit look like a mirror by comparison. In fact, I can send you some SLA models to play with. After you cover them with putty, sand for a couple of hours, and fill, you'll have something that is almost as good as a conventionally molded part . . . SLA machines and the like are capable of producing parts that are perfectly adequate for the (industrial) purposes they are intended. Unfortunately that's a good two orders of magnitude coarser that what a modern modeler would even consider in a kit.

VLS was talking about how they were going to start doing this for their resin masters about two years ago. Surprisingly, they've been rather quiet since, especially considering how enthusiastic they were before they actually tried it.

KL

please keep us updated. we gotta ride when it gets warmer. how about a day in dv?

As with most - if not all - technology, it all depends on what you apply it to. There are a lot of variables in the mix here - from the fineness of the mesh of your 3D model, to it's complexity, to the tech used for "printing"...which now that I look again, is stereo lithogaphy...so now I understand the price point. The Dimension 3D plastic printer that I am familiar with would do the job cheaper, I think. And maybe better...

But as with anything like this - it's an art. At least initially. For some types of parts, I think still this tech would work great.

Actually it might work for the grosser structures and you can save most of your effort for detailing and use the result as a resin master.

Yeah - I think this stuff is really cool.

I just got back from Maryland last week - it was in the upper 60's/low

...and if the band will let me off.

i'll send you some email about how to spring you from the band. bet you laugh your ass off. california is a strange state.

"Ron Smith" wrote

I'm sure that's what Bob Letterman had in mind, however the talk has disappeared from his newsletters and the increase in accuracy/decrease in cost/shorter time to market for their products is not evident. I think they discovered that although there might be a savings in producing the bulk form (the most quickly produced portion in conventional production) you must first have a pretty detailed (and preferably accurate) 3-D model of what it is you want to make. The SLA machine can't work with TLAR. . .

KL

Somehow it strikes me as too immature a technology for production use to be economical. Like I said it would be great for some things like ship's hulls and superstructures where you're going to add more detail for a resin master anyway. It might also work for the base of AFV hulls and turrets but you'd still need to clean them up and detail them. The saving would only be the labor of hand carving those masters.

Actually, what I'm more surprized by is the increasing number of obviously 3D models showing up in DML ads. This implies to me that the industry (or at least DML) is already using rapid prototyping techniques in bringing new items to market.

I agree - SLA/SLT probably is cost prohibitive for this application. But the plastic printer I know of is VERY cheap in comparison, and better suited to the task, IMO.

Actually, I know of a case where it's being used to make sight mounts for the US Army...using the raw printings.

But I'd certainly think that it'd be the nuts for making masters for figure models, for example...or car bodies. Or ship hulls, as you point out. I think it'd also work for instument panels, or any basically flat part built up in "layers".

We did a few models at my shop using the FDM or fused deposition modeling version. You are correct after several hours of sanding growth rings out of the part I ended up building it from scratch just as fast. there is a machine called the VIPER it's resolution is .002 fantastic finish but the by in cost for one of those machines is 250,000.00