Hacker News Reader

Comment by dm2 | Hacker News Reader

They should really have a working prototype or at least more than a vague rendered image before announcing something like this.

Can someone explain how the ship in the 3D printer concept rendering is suppose to be have been built and how it's staying in place?

http://inthefold.autodesk.com/.a/6a017c3334c51a970b01a3fd089...

In my opinion they should focus on making larger and stronger 3D objects and ways to make it easy and affordable rather than delicate looking model ships. If I could quickly print something like a 2 inch custom pipe joint (that was fairly strong) in a short amount of time then this thing would be very valuable.

View on HN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereolithography

It's literally fused to the surface as it's drawn up from the vat (imagine the apparatus shown in the Wikipedia diagram but upside-down with the laser below the resin vat)

The laser is below the resin container? How does that work?

Is there a similar built device that you know of?

The formlabs form 1 is a good example: http://formlabs.com/products/form-1/

Awesome, thanks, that makes sense now.

http://youtu.be/enJq2PquuPE?t=1m2s

Apologies! My bad! This is actually a Photolithographic printer

There was also this one called "Peachy" on hackaday last year http://hackaday.com/2013/09/22/a-100-stereolithography-3d-pr...

edit: also here's the link to the HN discussion of this printer https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6424132

Actually, this printer is likely DLP-based. Instead of a laser it uses a projector http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Light_Processing

I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out what it was they had printed until you said it was a ship (upside-down of course). The best I could come up with was the flying spaghetti monster.

I guess they're showing delicate things like this because the popular/cheap extruded plastic filament printers of today can't do things like that easily.

In fact, this BBC article goes into more detail about their thinking and plans: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27412849

Very true, whilst Autodesk is no longer constrained to its CAD background from an architectural or engineering perspective this is great. This type of resolution, allows us to print simulated tensile structures - or complex structural skeletons of buildings - which for me, working in architecture is really exciting.

> In my opinion they should focus on making larger

YES! Please someone make it larger. I would've bought the thing by now (any printer, under $3k) that lets me print something up to 12x12 inches.

I don't see why someone doesn't just do it already. You've got all the mechanism down, now why not just make it bigger? I am pretty sure I'm not the only, I keep hearing this over and over again. I don't get what's keeping these companies from making them bigger

Here's why: almost all materials used in 3D printing exhibit some structural problems in the curing phase.

For example, ABS and PLA have well known shrinkage when they cool. ABS can be a few % per layer. Each layer, then, is pulling against the previous. Imagine printing something like a flat disc. It will "want" to peel up at the edges. The larger the object, the more significant this shrinkage is. At 12" you are truly going to have problems.

For SLA printers like the Form1 and other printers that use optically cured material, the problem is the same. These parts exhibit "creep" and "warp" and in fact, many of them will warp badly in sunlight long after they've been printed. Also, depending on the mechanism of feature formation, the device doesn't scale. Look at the B9Creator with its projector - the larger you go, the less resolution you have.

While I have seen and produced prints much larger than you are talking about (on both professional and hobbyist printers), they have problems and limitations that could not be solved by simply extending the mechanism.

This already exists. Specifically the TypeA Machines Series 1 http://www.typeamachines.com/products/next-generation-series...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com