3D Printing....Instant Model update

[Ace-Garageguy]

No AG, I didn't miss any parts,

But,

When you say you and your friend are OUTSTANDING, is that up to par for what people would want to purchase??

Sure the tech is here but it will cost you a Million Bucks if you really want to make Models.

CadillacPat

Well, for starters, you might want to re-read what I said above more carefully, and apply that care to reading the latest developments in the tech before you spin-off saying the stuff is 20 years away and will cost $1million to actually produce something.That's just ludicrous. And NOWHERE did I say I WAS outstanding. I said the guy in my club was doing outstanding work. See the difference? Words and phrases have meanings, and accuracy is important, both in reading skills and modeling.

From what I have seen (a few 3D bodys and parts) and have read, that parts or bodys come out really rough, almost like a sand finish, so while 3D printing is coming, I dont think its 100% ready for models, but I could be wrong

Yes, the earlier output was grainy, BUT the resolution is getting better and better all the time. The guys developing it aren't sitting on their hands thinking they're so cool, or know it all....they're working on making the output consistent with industry accepted standards for injection-molded parts. I have SEEN, up close and personal, and HELD IN MY HAND parts that are 95% there.

Just a few years ago, a machine that would do what the $2200 one will do would have set you back $30,000. Anyone at least somewhat conversant with the developments in processing power vs. cost in computing over the last few years will get it.

[1930fordpickup]

I have worked with models made from rapid prototype before . This was in 1997 to 2000 before they started doing their own painting . This was a very rough finish back then for a model car. It was like wood grain.

Two years ago I held in my hand at the Toledo NNL parts from a newer machine, vastly improved product.

I think that Bill is hitting close to home with his comments . The only Question is if it cost 30 shipped for a bare shell what will it cost for the rest of the parts?

I think that the after market will change but the kit company's will start using this tech here and just send you what you ask for themselves.

I am sure they have been looking into this for sometime . The tool shop's around here have been into this for year's .

[Chief Joseph]

Bill, the $2200 printer you referenced in your original post, the MakerBot Replicator 2, is a great leap forward in desktop printing, but it still isn't there when it comes to fine details. From the article on the Replicator 2:

"So how about quality? The Replicator 2 has a layer resolution of 100µ (0.0039 in) and the images I’ve seen of objects created with the new system don’t show signs of obvious layer strata. MakerBot’s new machine also offers a build envelope of 11.2 x 6.0 x 6.1 in. (28.5 x 15.3 x 15.5 cm). Both layer thickness and build envelope are comparable or superior to professional desktop 3D printers."

0.0039" layer resolution is fantastic for a $2200 printer, but it is not sufficient to reproduce fine details like emblems in 1/24 or 1/25 scale. However, the build envelope of this printer is perfect for a car body and the resolution is more than sufficient for a typical body shell without fine details like door handles and emblems. There are other desktop printers that are capable of finer resolution, and better parts, but their build envelopes are very small and the material is more fragile. To get very fine resolutions with large parts, i.e. typical of a modern injection-molded styrene body, requires an industrial printer and a print would cost hundreds of dollars.

I'm curious as to what printer can do a very detailed car body for $30 from a model produced in Sketchup. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I want to know what printer can do that because I want one!

EDIT: okay, I went back and re-read the topic; I think I understand better what you're trying to relate, which is basically that quality and affordability is constantly getting better. There's no perfect personal printer YET, but they are certainly coming in the near future. Am I right?

Edited October 15, 2012 by Chief Joseph

[Lownslow]

Bill, the $2200 printer you referenced in your original post, the MakerBot Replicator 2, is a great leap forward in desktop printing, but it still isn't there when it comes to fine details. From the article on the Replicator 2:

"So how about quality? The Replicator 2 has a layer resolution of 100µ (0.0039 in) and the images I’ve seen of objects created with the new system don’t show signs of obvious layer strata. MakerBot’s new machine also offers a build envelope of 11.2 x 6.0 x 6.1 in. (28.5 x 15.3 x 15.5 cm). Both layer thickness and build envelope are comparable or superior to professional desktop 3D printers."

0.0039" layer resolution is fantastic for a $2200 printer, but it is not sufficient to reproduce fine details like emblems in 1/24 or 1/25 scale. However, the build envelope of this printer is perfect for a car body and the resolution is more than sufficient for a typical body shell without fine details like door handles and emblems. There are other desktop printers that are capable of finer resolution, and better parts, but their build envelopes are very small and the material is more fragile. To get very fine resolutions with large parts, i.e. typical of a modern injection-molded styrene body, requires an industrial printer and a print would cost hundreds of dollars.

I'm curious as to what printer can do a very detailed car body for $30 from a model produced in Sketchup. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I want to know what printer can do that because I want one!

EDIT: okay, I went back and re-read the topic; I think I understand better what you're trying to relate, which is basically that quality and affordability is constantly getting better. There's no perfect personal printer YET, but they are certainly coming in the near future. Am I right?

ive looked into the printer i actually signed up for one its perfect to make custom parts like wheels and tires and the occasional futuristic engine or 2

[CadillacPat]

I don't know why the acegarageguy feels that everyone has to believe him, or why he is so insistent that I believe him. Cause, I don't.

Others have already stated the quality of parts is not up to par with this machine.

It's grainy texture is not attractive for Model Building.

At the moment, it's not the Magic Machine you say it is Ace.

Are you sure you don't have this 3D Printer mixed up with the Atomic Simulator on Star Trek.

You know, the one where you ask for a Hamburger and it spits it out.

You have a couple of hundred parts in a Model Kit.

These cheap home machines will not be producing the hundreds of tiny detailed parts in an average Model Kit, for many many years to come.

I think it's interesting fodder for conversation, but I don't see this happening.

CadillacPat

[Fat Brian]

Realistically we are probably 3-5 years away from having a home unit that can reproduce parts of sufficient qualty to make it worth the investment for the average builder. Still, 3-5 years away from a technology that will fundementally change our hobby is pretty significant. This could do what the rewritable cd and mp3 player did to the music industry if the model companies are not ready and willing to adopt different busniess models. So right now the texture is a little rough, if the resolution of the printers multiplies at the same rate as that of digital cameras it should double every six to twelve months. In a few years the texture should be more like that of flat primer than sand, something very workable especially for one off custom kits. Only the outside of the body and any chrome parts need to be super smooth, everything else would probably benefit from having some texture to it.

[Ace-Garageguy]

EDIT: okay, I went back and re-read the topic; I think I understand better what you're trying to relate, which is basically that quality and affordability is constantly getting better. There's no perfect personal printer YET, but they are certainly coming in the near future. Am I right?

Exactly. Thank you.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Realistically we are probably 3-5 years away from having a home unit that can reproduce parts of sufficient qualty to make it worth the investment for the average builder. Still, 3-5 years away from a technology that will fundementally change our hobby is pretty significant. This could do what the rewritable cd and mp3 player did to the music industry if the model companies are not ready and willing to adopt different busniess models. So right now the texture is a little rough, if the resolution of the printers multiplies at the same rate as that of digital cameras it should double every six to twelve months.

Also part of the point I was attempting to make. Thank you too.

[Fat Brian]

Also part of the point I was attempting to make. Thank you too.

I am really excited about this technology, I guess since I do both sides of it, working with 3d models and building plastic ones. I just see how incredible it would be to make a 3d model of anything you want and be able to have it in plastic in whatever scale you like. If a builder isn't confident in their plastic working skills or is trying a technique for the first time they could do in the computer and make sure it's perfect before committing the final design to plastic. For instance, I'm going to chop the new 50 Olds but I'm stalling because I'm not exactly sure of how I want to go about it to get the look I want. If it was a 3d file I could work with it and modify it until I'm happy and then print out the finshed product ready to hit the paint booth. What if you could print out the tube chassis of a drag car or the rollcage to a stock car and it would be one piece and straight and all the tubes would actually be round and with no impossible to clean seams everywhere.

It will effect builders differently, some may not have much contact with it for a long time, while others will jump on it right away. Some people prefer to really chop up parts and let the plastic dust fly but some will prefer to do some things on the computer and start with ready to go parts. In the beginning you will able to choose your exposure to it, kind of like resin parts now. Some builders embrace the stuff and really use a lot of it and some have never and will never use it all. It is your personal choice and that won't change any time soon.

[shucky]

This is an interesting topic, one that I've been reading about for the last few years and have followed closely. As others have eluded, the current quality is not up to par for 1/24 and 1/25 scale. I do not see this putting the model companies out of business either nor do I see them "printing" your model and sending it to you. My guess is, aside from the tooling, injection molding is MUCH cheaper over the pond than say a model company "printing" a model and mailing it to you. Perhaps many years from now (like ... MANY years) when the cost of this stuff is super cheap it could be an alternative for limited edition kits, customs, etc. but I do not see it replacing tradional injection molds for model manufacturing. It would be an option for builders to acquire a model of something NOT currently offered by the manufacturers, but it would not replace traditional methods IMO. Will there be an aftermarket boom? Thats debatable also. I think the tech will catch on more and more but I do not see average modelers learning how to create 3D imagery to print their own kits or parts. Some will, but a small percent. I think the hot ticket here is the aftermarket creating and providing 3D images to end users of kits and parts. This allows them to go to printing services and print what they'd like.

The only negative I see of this, which has already started to happen is, just because a modeler can either "print" or has access to printed parts does not make them a better modeler. IMO, its just the opposite. The more a modeler does NOT have to develope their modeling skills and have custom parts handed to them which otherwise would have to be SCRATCHBUILT by hand eventually diminishes the necessary skills a modeler should be working to improve. A person can be super creative on a computer and produce the most attractive 3D printed parts, but lack the necessary skills required to actually assemble the model. I've seen this happen already on this very forum. This will definitely create controversy among modelers especially at "model contests" where some will still be "scratchbuilding" in the traditional sense and some will simply have printed parts put together. Should these type of builds fall into a class of their own? Its my opinion they should.

This will continue to get interesting as time progresses.

[Lownslow]

This is an interesting topic, one that I've been reading about for the last few years and have followed closely. As others have eluded, the current quality is not up to par for 1/24 and 1/25 scale. I do not see this putting the model companies out of business either nor do I see them "printing" your model and sending it to you. My guess is, aside from the tooling, injection molding is MUCH cheaper over the pond than say a model company "printing" a model and mailing it to you. Perhaps many years from now (like ... MANY years) when the cost of this stuff is super cheap it could be an alternative for limited edition kits, customs, etc. but I do not see it replacing tradional injection molds for model manufacturing. It would be an option for builders to acquire a model of something NOT currently offered by the manufacturers, but it would not replace traditional methods IMO. Will there be an aftermarket boom? Thats debatable also. I think the tech will catch on more and more but I do not see average modelers learning how to create 3D imagery to print their own kits or parts. Some will, but a small percent. I think the hot ticket here is the aftermarket creating and providing 3D images to end users of kits and parts. This allows them to go to printing services and print what they'd like.

The only negative I see of this, which has already started to happen is, just because a modeler can either "print" or has access to printed parts does not make them a better modeler. IMO, its just the opposite. The more a modeler does NOT have to develope their modeling skills and have custom parts handed to them which otherwise would have to be SCRATCHBUILT by hand eventually diminishes the necessary skills a modeler should be working to improve. A person can be super creative on a computer and produce the most attractive 3D printed parts, but lack the necessary skills required to actually assemble the model. I've seen this happen already on this very forum. This will definitely create controversy among modelers especially at "model contests" where some will still be "scratchbuilding" in the traditional sense and some will simply have printed parts put together. Should these type of builds fall into a class of their own? Its my opinion they should.

This will continue to get interesting as time progresses.

i would consider what i do scratch building making 3d parts isnt exactly a easy thing to do.

[Fat Brian]

Do we currently put purchased resin bodies in a different category? I've never seen it done. Just because you can print it out doesn't mean it will totally paint and assemble it's self. Yes, the builder will have less invested in some areas but if they desingned the parts themselves they will have increased skills in another area. I hope that this technology won't lead to a whole "You didn't really build that, you're not a true modeler" bunch of mess. We all except for the very few super talented and ambitious among us start from a kit at some point, I mean they are very few totally DIY 100% scratchbuilders out there.

[sjordan2]

Here's a progress report on a scratchbuilt 1/8 Lola T-70 Spyder, using a variety of custom 3D printed components.

http://www.scalemoto...0-spyder-2.html

Edited October 15, 2012 by sjordan2

[shucky]

Scratchbuilding in the "virtual" world (on a computer) is not the same thing as scratchbuilding BY HAND with actual pieces, parts, tools.

i would consider what i do scratch building making 3d parts isnt exactly a easy thing to do.

[shucky]

Not the same thing. A resin body is one thing, a printed kit and "customized" parts is another. There IS a difference between scratchbuilding by hand from scraps of styrene, aluminum, etc. and "creating" your parts in the virtual world on a computer and printing them out. Different set of skills involved.

Do we currently put purchased resin bodies in a different category? I've never seen it done. Just because you can print it out doesn't mean it will totally paint and assemble it's self. Yes, the builder will have less invested in some areas but if they desingned the parts themselves they will have increased skills in another area. I hope that this technology won't lead to a whole "You didn't really build that, you're not a true modeler" bunch of mess. We all except for the very few super talented and ambitious among us start from a kit at some point, I mean they are very few totally DIY 100% scratchbuilders out there.

[Fat Brian]

If I buy a pre costomized body from Jimmy Flintstone how is that any different than having it printed out? I still didn't contribute anything to the body other than painting it. I would say a person who desings and prints their own parts has more invested in them than someone who buys precustomized parts and just assembles them. This is exactly what I was talking about, what is the purpose in this gradation of who is a real builder and who isn't?

Edited October 15, 2012 by Fat Brian

[shucky]

I'll say this. If I were to judge a model contest and there were 2 cars very similar and one had many scratchbuilt items on it made by the builder and one was of equal quality but featured 3D printed parts instead, I would give the nod to the version which had the scratchbuilt parts.

IMO, I wouldn't get the same satisfaction from buying or printing 3D printed parts if I could have made it from scratch myself. Thats just me. Not saying everyone has to agree. I would have no problem buying 3D printed parts, thats not what I'm saying. I also will use some resin here and there (including my own). Its just that I can see how this could eventually become questioned among builders, especially at contests as these parts become more and more available and attainable. I think if the model is being judged, it would be taken into consideration whether the parts were 3D printed (or even resin) as opposed to scratchbuilt by hand.

[Lownslow]

Scratchbuilding in the "virtual" world (on a computer) is not the same thing as scratchbuilding BY HAND with actual pieces, parts, tools.

same thing different skill set

[niteowl7710]

I think the real potential here lies within a business model being adopted by the Revells of the world. This tech still needs work in refinement and price, but unlike traditional means of manufacturing this is TECH we're talking about here which means it will grow exponentially while falling in price. So it's probably a good 5-7 years out still, but imagine if you will for a second where these printers are around $300-500 and can spit out things that are at worst good quality resin, and more along the lines of current model kit parts.

The business model then becomes this...say for a kit like the much vaunted '70 Hemi Cuda. Everyone seems to have an idea about how this kit should be done and optioned....AAR, 340, 6 cyl, which wheels, etc etc etc. So Revell sells you your $30 Cuda kit, and includes a redeemable code to 3D parts. You enter the code and your printer fires off a 6 cyl and dog-dish hubcaps. If you decide later you'd rather have a AAR, for $3 viola you have all your AAR specific parts.

The variety is endless to make base model cars, to make special edition cars, to make sedans (Print up a new body and interior) and on and on. This could potentially free up gobs of development cash because Revell (or Moebius) would just have digital files of all the "off-the-shelf" parts so one kit of a '57 Chevy could be built as a 110, 210, Bel Air, 4 door, 2door or Convertible with whatever engine and transmission choices you wanted, and they wouldn't be forced to eat the cost of tooling anything other than the initial kit. I bring up the Tri-5 kits because Revell is finally doing a '57 Convertible...and it's what...25 years after the '55 BelAir Convertible introduced the tooling? I think they would sell an equal amount of kits, perhaps more if they released a '55, '56 & '57 "base kit" so you would have all the basic mechanicals and parts to build a model of a Bel Air of each vintage. Then for a fee (which wouldn't be anything resembling the cost of an entire model kit itself -- since you'd be printing the specific parts yourself) you could then print out a '55 Nomad, '56 Convertible and '57 210 Sedan, each of which would require the base kit for the "guts" but the model company itself wouldn't be incurring the cost of modifying the tooling repeatedly over the course of 2 and Half DECADES (and we still don't have a '57 Nomad or '56 Convertible yet). The same thing goes for the '69 Camaro, that tool is a zombie at this point and they're still putting out variations. Imagine after they tooled the original kit, for $5 a piece you could have printed the necessary conversion parts for the B-M, Yenko, Convertible and ZL-1 versions right at your work bench. Revell gets what they want, you buying multiple copies of a kit to pay off the tooling. We get what we want which is every version of the model NOW! O.K. so perhaps there's a bit of over-the-top instant gratification in that.

Everyone at Revell keeps their jobs because kits will still be produced and people will be needed to design the parts and how they attach to the base model, draw directions for the kit and parts and all of that. There will still be basic styrene kits for the base kits, and those who for whatever reason (can't afford a printer, are too cheap, are mortified of new Tech) can't/don't want to participate, and I can have a Ferrari Italia Spyder without waiting on Revell AG to decide to modify/create new tooling for one.

[CadillacPat]

Yes, years and years out there,

What about the logistics of one guy using a program and files to print every single part of a Model kit.

You can't just walk away, you have to empty the print chamber every time a part is finished.

It would probably take 2 or 3 days and I bet the price would be sky high even when they do get a machine that will do it.

Depending on the size of the print chamber and the capabilities of the program, maybe you could print a handful of small pieces all at one time.

What about print material costs? You know that's where they are going to get you, every time you need a print cartridge.

I can see these being used for design purposes but not necessarily for making Model Car kits.

I could see this 3D Model Printing in a decade or two along the same lines as people who make decals on ALPS Printers.

Very few because of the expertise involved and each person producing items of different quality and finish.

With a Home Depot and WalMart on every corner I don't see why any household would ever need a machine like this to produce items they could easily go purchase.

I can't see a guy laying out the cash for a Printer that would produce Model bodies in the expectation of making a profit back.

We're not talking about a $2200 machine, that would not cut it, much much more money.

Now if it could promise to print me out a Rolex and a pair of Alligator boots it might get my attention.

CadillacPat

Edited October 16, 2012 by CadillacPat

[Jantrix]

IMO, I wouldn't get the same satisfaction from buying or printing 3D printed parts if I could have made it from scratch myself.

If this technology were readily available, there would be no need to scratch-build parts. Yeah, you might get a warm and fuzzy, "I built that there dinglewhopper" feeling for building it yourself, but I look at it this way. It already takes me far to long to build a model. If I can shave a couple of hours by 3d printing my parts instead of scratching them, guess what I'm going to do?

And I think Pat has a point. Not everyone would have a NEED for a 3d printer in there home. So I don't see that Xerox will be rushing to get this to market.

As for contest, we can already get nearly any part resin cast by somebody, really what is the difference? Only the skills of the guy/gal building the model. As it should be.

[Foxer]

TDR Innovations. Someone HAS already ventured into this, if you all remember!

[Pumba]

i can just see the conversations if we all had access to this. "hey, have you seen my new 34 ford build??" 'no, but email the files over and i'll print one up". just doesnt sound right. hahaha

[Fat Brian]

Microsoft is Trying hamstring digital printing with DRM.

Patent could shackle 3D printers with DRM

15:29 16 October 2012

Paul Marks, chief technology correspondent

One of the greatest benefits of 3D printing technology - the ability to make replacements or parts for household objects like toys, utensils and gadgets - may be denied to US citizens thanks to the granting of a sweeping patent that prevents the printing of unauthorised 3D designs. It has all the makings of the much-maligned digital rights management (DRM) system that prevented copying of Apple iTunes tracks - until it was abandoned as a no-hoper in 2009.

US patent 8286236, granted on 9 October to Intellectual Ventures of Bellevue, Washington, lends a 3D printer the ability to assess whether a computer design file it's reading has an authorization code appended that grants access for printing. If it does not, the machine simply refuses to print - whether it's a solid object, a textile or even food that's being printed.

The piracy of 3D designs is an emerging concern, and 3D object sharing - rather than file sharing - sites have already sprung up. While no 3D printer maker has adopted what might be called "3D DRM", international treaties like the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement mean it is not out of the question. Clamping down on moves to 3D-print handguns may fuel such moves, for instance.

What has riled some tech commentators is the fact that Intellectual Ventures that does not make 3D printers at all, but simply trades in patent rights - a practice detractors call patent trolling.

The firm, run by Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold, quietly files patents under the names of a great many shell companies (as this Stanford University analysis shows) and then licenses them to companies using the ideas it lays claim to, litigating if it has to. Intellectual Ventures is thought to hold more than 40,000 patents.

The new patent may face challenges to its validity, however, because it extends rights management beyond 3D printing to much older computerized manufacturing techniques, such as computer-controlled milling, extrusion, die casting and stamping.

Companies in those businesses are likely to have previously considered some kind of design rights authentication, says Greg Aharonian, of bustpatents.com in San Francisco. He says that museums were wondering how to protect 3D sculptures against printer piracy back in 2002 and that DRM was in the frame then. So Intellectual Ventures' claim to novelty - a key part of whether any patent is determined to be valid and enforceable - looks weak.

[Ace-Garageguy]

As far as 'is it scratch-built or not?' goes, like somebody already said, it's an entirely different skill-set, and one I personally have embraced and started on the rather steep learning curve. I kinda like to have a lot of skills, and to be able to pick-and-choose for a particular application.

As far as DRM goes, I only think that really bothers people who want something for nothing. Why, oh why, should someone spend hours and hours lovingly measuring and digitizing a set of components for a car, and then have his work distributed for free, unless he VOLUNTEERS TO GIVE IT AWAY? I pay for my music, my movies, technical publications, even additional $$ for the rights to read certain technical papers from SAE, where I'm a paying member. Why expect digital files that conttain info sufficient to copy virtually anything (eventually) to be free?

I attended a rapid-prototyping trade show here (Design2Part) in the spring and was amazed to see the capability of this technology then. I'm even more amazed to see the advances that have become available SINCE that time. This isn't going away, and it's coming fast, no matter how many nay-sayers with their heads stuck firmly in the sand (or other dark places) say otherwise.

One more point...the rapid fall in price for access to this technology over the past few years demonstrates that SOMEBODY is buying it, and in pretty good numbers. The prices on manufactured goods don't plummet just because the manufacturer wants to get a warm feeling by selling stuff cheap. And no, every household may not want or need one, but how long ago could the same thing have been said about the copiers/printers based on Xerox tech, sitting on all of your desks right now?

Edited October 17, 2012 by Casey