Check this out.

Started by yossam, August 25, 2015, 05:02:58 am

Previous topic - Next topic

PabloMack

Materials were $7000 that means it will easily be over $25,000 after adding engineering, labor (they weren't counting these), shipping and handling, retail markup and taxes.

I just bought an injection molding machine today ;) I looked into manufacturing with 3D printers and the per unit cost is pretty high. You pay a premium for getting something custom and quick. With traditional injection molding you have to have a mold and that can be expensive but the manufacturing cost can be pennies per unit depending on the size of the part. For 1sies and 2sies 3D printing is nice but injection molding will also be cheaper for volume. I think where 3D printing really has a future in manufacturing is where you make the mold with a 3D printer and then use it for injection molding for production.

yossam

I've got some experience with injection molding but on a commercial scale. PET containers.............and yes the molds are very expensive.

PabloMack

August 26, 2015, 08:21:17 pm #3 Last Edit: August 26, 2015, 08:43:39 pm by PabloMack
It's surprising to find out what each of us had done in our past lives. Here's a 2-part video about resin casting of a model designed in Z-Brush that I think a lot of us in this group would find interesting. I think I might end up doing something like this to make molds more cheaply.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSAisYcfMcI

The head of the model is shaped like the abdomen of an assassin bug. Yuck!

http://growingsmallfarms.ces.ncsu.edu/growingsmallfarms-assassinbug/

The reason why the bug's abdomen is sometimes concave is so that it can expand like a bellows as it fills with its victim's body juices or blood. Creepy to see one of these things suck the life out of something else while it is just walking along minding it own business. We have these things in Texas and they are jet black with red borders. They can carry serious diseases so watch for them when camping.

yossam


PabloMack

August 27, 2015, 12:54:23 am #5 Last Edit: August 28, 2015, 10:05:18 pm by PabloMack
Seems that 3D printers have the glamour but the limited number of materials they can build with usually don't imbue their parts the quality needed for usability unless you just intend to set them on your desktop for conversation pieces. CNC mills can work with many more materials and there are a number on the market. I'm getting pretty interested in one called X-Carve by Inventables and its pricing starts at only $799. But you have to assemble much of it yourself which is okay.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3046939/most-creative-people/as-makerbot-struggles-desktop-milling-machines-are-on-the-rise

www.inventables.com/

PabloMack

August 22, 2016, 09:14:23 am #6 Last Edit: August 22, 2016, 05:45:46 pm by PabloMack
I bought the guts of an X-Carve a few weeks ago with the plans of turning it into a robotic solder paste machine. It comes in kit form. I put it together and added the modifications and it is now a working solder paste machine. The X-Carve is a nice open-source modular system that has a lot of potential. I just bought what is called a direct drive 3D printer extruder. I want to understand how standard 3D printers work. I did some research and I think I know how I can modify one of these machines to build a really super 3D printer. I will need to have some of the custom parts made to replace the standard ones. Using 1m rails instead of 500mm. I am envisioning a 3D printer than can build models that have the proportions of up to 1m cubic. My only concern is that even small models take a long time to make. Large models will take exponentially longer and need a lot more material. For things like life-like dinosaur reconstructions, one could just 3D print a frame that is strong enough to finish it by adding "skin" to the surface. My wife and I are registered to attend the SVP meetings in Salt Lake City. There are a number of vendors that will be there at the show part of the meetings displaying their wares. Some of these companies sell models. I'm anxious to talk to some of these people as I've done in the past. But this time will be different because I'm seriously thinking about doing some things of my own. I have a number of 3D models of Mesozoic animals I've built in the past. I'd love to see them in physical form. These still need a lot of work. I composited two of my models with a Serengeti scene just to get an idea of size and perspective.

Dune

Cool, apparently you're a very technical guy. I wish you luck.
Come to think about 3D printing; the other day I saw that link to a printer that hauled some model out of liquid.... wouldn't it be possible to harden liquid or even vapour in 3D space by laser techniques? Intersecting areas of (many) different laserbeams setting off consolidation of material, sort of. Or did I just give away the Method of the Century, worth millions....  ???

Kadri

Quote from: Dune on August 22, 2016, 10:06:36 am
Cool, apparently you're a very technical guy. I wish you luck.
Come to think about 3D printing; the other day I saw that link to a printer that hauled some model out of liquid.... wouldn't it be possible to harden liquid or even vapour in 3D space by laser techniques? Intersecting areas of (many) different laserbeams setting off consolidation of material, sort of. Or did I just give away the Method of the Century, worth millions....  ???


Kind of this :
https://www.ted.com/talks/joe_desimone_what_if_3d_printing_was_25x_faster?language=en

PabloMack

August 22, 2016, 06:01:08 pm #9 Last Edit: August 22, 2016, 06:08:30 pm by PabloMack
Quote from: Dune on August 22, 2016, 10:06:36 amCool, apparently you're a very technical guy. I wish you luck.


Thank you.

Quote from: Dune on August 22, 2016, 10:06:36 am.... wouldn't it be possible to harden liquid or even vapour in 3D space by laser techniques? Intersecting areas of (many) different laserbeams setting off consolidation of material, sort of. Or did I just give away the Method of the Century, worth millions....  ???


Yes, I've had the same notion. I think the problem with that is that I don't think there are any polymers that react only with intersecting laser beams. Those that will react at the intersections will also partially react with the single non-intersecting beams. So you will be partially solidifying the liquids that your single beams are passing through to get to the points that you want to solidify. It might seem that you could use destructive interference between two lasers to make surfaces where the chemicals would not react. But these have harmonics so constructive interference occurs at multiple points, not at just the node you want. Its fraught with problems. Beams intersecting can just as easily cancel as add. Perhaps you could use a frequency that is not energetic enough in itself to bring about a reaction. Multiple beams would add more photons but not increase the energy of a single photon which is what is needed to bring about reaction. So my gut feeling is that is wouldn't work. Its pretty intuitive though.

Vapor is another interesting idea. I think this might work but you must consider two things. Many complex organic molecules will burn before they boil. With very low pressure you could probably pull it off. But the density (and therefore buildup) would probably be too slow to be economical. Electroplating is sort of done this way using liquids instead of gases but the deposition rate is so slow that you will only achieve thin layers in a reasonable amount of time. I think spraying could speed the process up. But then there is the resolution vs. speed tradeoff.

Dune

Guys that really know all about these physics will undoubtedly find another way in the coming decades, progress is going at a staggering rate anyway. I just thought about the lasers as they use them to pulverize gall stones I believe, at intersecting beams. If I understood well.

PabloMack

August 24, 2016, 12:33:33 pm #11 Last Edit: August 25, 2016, 09:02:55 am by PabloMack
Quote from: Dune on August 23, 2016, 02:06:03 amGuys that really know all about these physics will undoubtedly find another way in the coming decades, progress is going at a staggering rate anyway. I just thought about the lasers as they use them to pulverize gall stones I believe, at intersecting beams. If I understood well.


The kidney stone treatment I am familiar with uses ultrasound to break them up. The stones are brittle while the soft tissue around them is not. Ultrasound can be somewhat focused to intensify it through a point. But the surrounding soft tissue will not shatter because it is not a solid, not because the power may be slightly less intense than where the stones are.

What you are saying is certainly to happen. Instead of just waiting for a really great technology to come out, I figure I can best spend my time getting some experience with what is the standard technology right now. In my youth I'd burned up too much of my hard earned income in the past by putting myself on the bleeding edge of technology. In the wisdom of my older age I'll let others do that. In the mean time, I will learn how do to what is pretty standard stuff now. It might keep me from getting too far behind later on. I want to be ready to "hit the ground running" as they say.

Paul