3D Printers and RepRap project

[ivan]

What's the difference between low-costs 3D desktops and scanners and laser sintering technology as 3D Systems machines?

I have read about this project
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RepRap_Project

What do you think about?

It seems interesting.

Ivan

[RPManager]

Hi Ivan,

I think that 1 of the main difference is the mechanical characteristics of the base material worked.

Usually the 3D printers use a acrylic resin based, that mechanically is really far respect the thermoplastic powder used on the 3D Systems RP machines.

About the interesting it depends always to the functionally that you want from the prototypes.
Usually 3D printer builds more aesthetical pieces respect SLS machine (from 3D Systems for instance) that build real functional prototypes.

Cheers.
Fede.

[ivan]

Yeah

I think now it's something like a toy or an idea under development.

Can these technologies have a future as desktop peripheral, with low and affordable costs for everyone?

I'm thinking about peripherals than can reproduce objects with no functionality (as yet you said).

Quoting Wiki

It is worth remembering that the goal of the RepRap project is not to produce a pure self-replicating device for it own sake but rather to put in the hands of individuals anywhere on the planet, for a minimal outlay of capital, a desktop manufacturing system that will enable the individual to manufacture many of the artifacts used in everyday life. The self-replicating nature of RepRap will also facilitate its viral dissemination and may well facilitate a major paradigm shift in the design in manufacture of consumer products from one of patented, factory production to open-source, personal production.

Is this the starting point of something new? What do you think?

Ivan

[livia]

Hi Guys!

I think that 3D printer are still far from RM applications...I mean, if you need just to have a look to a part, and there are no loads involved and no performance required, maybe it's the best solution: easy, no pollution, enough quick...usually cheap...
But if you need hi-performance and hi-quality it's necessary to shift to laser sintering or SLA, that are a little more difficult to run (need good skills and technical knowledge) and expansive...but with them it's now possible to reach very good results!

[bobsteele]

I am probably going to annoy some people with these comments, but there it is! javascript:void(0);
Smiley The 3D system LS machines are pretty much rubbish at this point, and unless they can pull a rabbit out of a hat as far as quantum improvements in their process, then this is a dying branch on the RP/RM tree.
There are solutions out there which show promise, EOS’s process looks good now, but I think will run out of legs in its current form within 10 years (not able to do multiple materials within one build) However, these machines are able to produce fully robust parts – at a price. This needs to reduce and the physical size too. Then we would have something that is starting to look like an appliance as a laser printer or inkjet printer is today.
The toy where people download a software package (SolidWorks) and then send the design off to a printer (ZCorp) is possibly going to popularize the concept of RM with a group of buyers who would not otherwise be exposed to the technologies at this point. The thorn here might be the quality / longevity of the product they get back, which might put them off the technology for other things built this way.
There are too many people who confuse RP and RM, while the two have a definite overlap, an RP machine is not an adequate RM process. CNC machining is also a RP / RM device, with a leaning toward RM. The quality of parts are not comparable. We use predominantly LS from EOS for our work, and have been very happy with the robustness and the quality of the parts – except for price! RepRap is a novelty which MIGHT help spur along development of better systems. It does provide a great place for people to get their hands dirty and become enthusiastic about Rp / RM – and that is great! To think that it will develop into anything useful is wishful thinking at this point. It will absolutely need some big names and big money behind it to do anything really useful.
The RP machines of today are probably going to struggle along for a while. Stratasys keep on putting out affordable machines which produce passable aesthetic models. Structurally they are hopeless and therefore don’t make the transition to an RM device. I have a client who has three of these machines (2 x Dimension & 1 Large format Stratasys) in their development department, and they use our services to produce functional parts very regularly.
Personally, I am waiting for atomic manipulation to be available, where the machine has a container of all of the atomic parts and can put them together in some sort of containment field which will prevent massive explosions and allow us to build any conceivable thing, including food and replacement body parts. Hopefully it will be the ultimate recycling machine too, stripping apart unwanted things to be built into something new. We would need a hell of a power source though!!

[livia]

Hi Bobsteele! What a passion and what a wonderful place you live in! In my next life I will live overthere, I hope!

By the way, to be honest it's really difficult to say which laser sintering machine is better, between EOS and 3D Sys (DTM).
We know very very well both EOS and 3D Sys technologies and managements...and at the end we always chose 3D Sys. We make R&D on materials and so we need an “open” machine and SW, and EOS is very closed and “limited”. Both EOS and 3D Sys machines lack of reliability and repeatability, but 3D Sys has the best patent in this technology: the ROLLER!! And something more…in any case we were able to suit our materials for 3D Sys and EOS machines too and they run the same…and the final performance is fine on EOS machines too! So EOS it’s fine too!
Actually I have to say that it’s really possible to make RM on laser sintering machines and lots of service providers and end users are doing it! On F1 racing cars (not only windtunnel I mean) for example there are many aerodynamic parts, covers, fluid ducts, and so on made by SLS and on street cars too! And the same on racing or street motorbikes, and bikes…and so many other applications…The real problem is not the mechanical performance of parts, but the thermal one! I mean, since we are at room temperature (or a little over) it’s possible to use laser sintered parts as aluminium or magnesium parts (with the same loads!), when the temperatures go over 150/180 C deg it’s necessary to make parts in metal alloys…in particular with high loads.

Last, if we have to speak about dreams, soon or late these technology will be productive and reliable as CNC machining …but we have to wait for years at least!

Other RP technologies, besides SLA that is more or less the same performance as LS, actually are not ready for hi-performance parts, not enough stiffness, not enough UTS, low details definition, very low thermal properties…just perfect for designers and cheap applications…

Ah, I’m not annoyed! I love to exchange opinions and to get in touch with other minds! It’s the basis for every biz!!

Cheers!

[ivan]

Originally Posted by bobsteele

RepRap is a novelty which MIGHT help spur along development of better systems. It does provide a great place for people to get their hands dirty and become enthusiastic about Rp / RM – and that is great! To think that it will develop into anything useful is wishful thinking at this point. It will absolutely need some big names and big money behind it to do anything really useful.

I am in agreement with you.
This is a project that opens to the people a world that before substantially was blind. I believe that no one today can imagine what it will be the future of this idea.
You are wright, an open source project has however the necessity of having an adequate financing for being able to develop itself.

Ivan

[livia]

Hi Guys!

Please, remember that business is business...and that no one makes something for nothing...
If a big brand will support from a financial point of view this project...the true and useful results won't be published and free! or at least for the first...10 years? until it will be useless for the big brand!

In the meantime what will be published will be only lots of communication and marketing… to sell smoky dreams…and collect money.

True R&D is confidential because it is made for a biz goal, to allow sponsoring companies to earn a competitor advantage…and this is fair competition!!

[Dash-Cae]

The material properties are what make the difference between the two mediums, & of course most 3d printers don't use lasers (which is where the cost is).
There are enough 3d printer systems out there now to replace Laser sintering machines. Stratasys offer a good material range & low cost machines. I too am affraid that SLS machines have run their course for plastics.

A Particularly good new commer to the 3d Printer schene is Objet...by far the best surface finish (you can even print Mat of Gloss!). & there is nothing to stop you taking a mould. No Hand finishing required, Build sizes in excess of all other RP technology (up to 500mm), & cheap machines too. The materials will get more advanced, but are comparable with SLA technology for now.

The Future is Rapid manufacturing machines...They can be Electron beam or laser sintering devices which produce metal (Ti, steel, gold, copper etc..). with full wrought properties. The technology is as expensive as the current SLS devices but the parts produced have real wrought metal properties. The Surface finish is still not perfect, & you should consider the technoilgy replacing casting...Generally machining will be required to finish the part...
Watch out SLS Patterns & Investment Casting!!

[livia]

Welcome Dash-Cae!

have you ever compared technical data sheets of Objet materials and laser sintering materials? For example, the UTS or the HDT...or Volume resistance...

I think that each application has the right technology, referring to value for money and need for mechanical, thermal and electrical properties. It is already possible RM with reinforced plastics, but only with LS, not at all with Stratasys machines...even if i still believe that they have great machines and brilliant technology!

About metal alloys sintering, the working area is still too little, the reliability and repeatability is definitely low, and the precision is still far away from rapid castings. But that is the right direction, just some development and i'm sure that it will be possible to obtain a good near-net-shape part (like rapid casting), just to be finished by CNC machining and maybe some coatings.