Whats special about the goal of 'reprap' vs existing capabilities/realities like CNC milling machines

and maybe that's why his name is "Talk-To-You-later", because he is never going to stop!

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/07/2011 08:04PM by kyleeamonahern.

@TTYlater:
Do you accept that a virus is self-replicating? Because if you do, than RepRap is self-replicating; if not, then we are never going to meet on common ground.

Characteristics of a virus:
A virus is a small infectious agent that can replicate only inside the living cells of organisms. ... About 5,000 viruses have been described in detail, although there are millions of different types. ... Viruses are found in almost every ecosystem on Earth and are the most abundant type of biological entity. ... Some viruses including those causing AIDS and viral hepatitis evade these immune responses and result in chronic infections. Antibiotics have no effect on viruses, but several antiviral drugs have been developed. ... Viruses are an important natural means of transferring genes between different species, which increases genetic diversity and drives evolution.

[Source: [en.wikipedia.org] ]

A virus is incapable of existing and self-reproducing alone "in the wild" - it survives and reproduces by subverting the chemistry and biology of the cells of the host organism for its own reproduction. It doesn't even carry all of the chemical "raw material" that it needs to reproduce - it gets almost all of the "stuff" it needs to reproduce from the host. It may be injurious (or even fatal) to the host - it doesn't care, as long as enough new viruses are produced before the host dies, and as long as new hosts can be found, then the virus will propagate. Some viruses survive and propagate though a symbiotic relationship with the host; for example, converting waste products into useful constituent chemicals. In essence, it is the DNA of the virus that self-replicates (albeit with mutations) - the virus "package" and the host are just the vectors used to reproduce the DNA of the virus.

RepRap has "gone viral" in every sense of the word:

Characteristics of a RepRap:
A RepRap is a small infectious machine that can replicate only inside the mind of hosts. ... About 50 RepRaps have been described in detail, although there are thousands of different types. ... RepRaps are found in almost every ecosystem on Earth and are the most abundant type of domestic 3D printer. ... Some RepRaps result in chronic infections. Wives / Husbands / Significant Others have no effect on RepRaps, and no anti-RepRap drugs have been developed. ... RepRaps are an important means of transferring design ideas between different species of RepRap, which increases genetic diversity and drives evolution.

[Source: You read it here first! ]

A RepRap is incapable of existing and self-reproducing alone "in the wild" - it survives and reproduces by subverting the mind and wallet of the host organism for its own reproduction. It doesn't even carry all of the physical "raw material" that it needs to reproduce - it gets the "vitamins" it needs to reproduce from the host (and the local hardware shop). It may be injurious (or even fatal) to the host - it doesn't care, as long as enough new RepRaps are produced before the host dies (or loses interest), and as long as new hosts can be found, then RepRap will propagate. Some RepRaps survive and propagate though a symbiotic relationship with the host; for example, converting plastic filament into useful objects. In essence, it is the DNA of the RepRap that self-replicates (albeit with mutations) - the RepRap "machine" and the host are just the vectors used to reproduce the DNA of RepRap.

Stone hammers don't exist for the purpose of making more stone hammers; lathes don't exist to make other lathes; CNC Mills don't exist to make other CNC Mills; the vast majority of tools are invented in order to make other things. But herein lies the distinction - it is of the very essence of RepRap that a prime purpose of its existence is to self-reproduce - as well as to make "useful stuff" for the host.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/07/2011 10:16PM by julianh72.

---

Follow my Mendel Prusa build here: [julianh72.blogspot.com]

Who wants to learn, gets it the first 1-2-3 chances. Who doesnt want to, will never get it. At some point the inner tendecies create some clear outside differences allowing one to distinguish. I dunno why u ppls still bother.

NoobMan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dunno why u ppls still bother.


Because it's fun to engage in an ultimately futile debate in an attempt to convert someone that you truly, deeply believe (know!) to be wrong!

(TTYlater is probably thinking exactly the same thing!)

---

Follow my Mendel Prusa build here: [julianh72.blogspot.com]

I am a fan of lost causes, but changing this guy opinions is particularly too far fetched even for me

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2011 05:24AM by NoobMan.

Quote
nophead
No I am arguing that reprap machines are more popular than CNC routers because you can put one in a normal domestic setting due to being small, quiet, clean and cheap.

And I have been arguing that you can have a CNC milling machine in a normal domestic setting, being that they can also be small, quiet, clean and cheap also.

Just so we are all clear, not all consumer grade 3D printers are cheap (e.g. makerbot, ultimaker, alibre built printers, or even many full reprap kits). Many are actually quite expensive, in the order of $1-2k at least. Not every reprapper manage to ring in at the bare minimum price to build it.

Quote
nophead
Irrelevant statement. What has the size of a Z corp machine got to do with reprap?

I brought that up as an example of how ridiculous it will be to compare apples to oranges. You were doing that by saying CNC milling machines in general suck because commercial grade CNC milling centers are way more expensive and larger compared to DIY reprap machines. I put that as a counter example of why its silly to argue like that, since in cost and in size Z corp 3D printers are then in contrast much larger and more expensive than homeshop CNC milling machines like the Taig or Sherline. There is no rules to the game. Gotta judge on a case by case basis here for everything.

Quote
nophead
Yes I have one. Much louder than my Pursa, which is almost silent. Just the spindle running with no load is louder.

You will notice I mentioned in my earlier posts that some CNC mill builds can be loud when you have "crap spindles" (quoting myself there).

If your CNC router is based on having a three axis kinematic stage and then you bolt down a commercial wood router cutter as most do on one of the axis, then that type falls into what I consider the 'crap spindle' crowd. Wood routers are noisy. I agree with this.

Proper milling machine spindles designed for metalworking (but of course it can handle others also) are and can be very quiet, especially when operating at very high RPM. These often include high precision spindle assemblies with torque transfer by pulley/gear systems powered by conventional motors or steppers, or even air turbine spindles etc.

The kinematic stage of those machines are also quiet and better built than DIY machines. Which goes back to my original point, what you will mostly hear from a milling machine of that type is mainly cutting action. Stepper noise also sometimes but I discounted that because reprap suffers from the same problem as a source of noise.

Quote
nophead
Yes you keep taking about machines with full enclosures. Not something you can buy for the price of a reprap.

You can build your own enclosure as many do. This is cheap. Homeshop machines are often not designed with enclosure like milling centers. But you can get third party addons which is basically just a box, and those are expensive. You can also build one and it can be super cheap. Since most people who own milling machines are also often technical folks also, it often wont be hard for them to build one themselves, especially if they are the build everything and not the buy everything crowd.

Quote
nophead
Maybe true for Makerbots with no microstepping, but not true for the current generation of Reprap, which is Prusa with 16th step drivers and it is almost silent, quieter than a laser printer.

True, but what has that got to do with Reprap?

Here you go mixing up cheap CNC mills and expensive ones again. If you get a CNC mill for a similar price to a reprap it will have a noisy spindle and no enclosure. If you get a nice quiet one with a full enclosure you are in a another price bracket.

Price to build a DIY full enclosure for a standard benchtop milling machine is in the order of ~100 bucks or less depending on your choice of materials. Less if you use old materials around the house.

Quote
nophead
Again you are dead wrong. A CNC lathe cannot make much of itself. Most mills and routers cannot either. Yes CNC machines are used to make other CNC machines, but not copies of themselves. For example a major part of a lathe is the bed. Not something you can pick up in a hardware store. Also not something you make with a lathe. The spindle of a mill is not something you make with a mill, you need a lathe.

I mentioned this so many times. There are absolutely so many variations in CNC mills and lathes that its hard to draw a genre anymore. Many systems, yes even home systems, are a combination of mill and lathe. These machines do everything.

Ok here is where again you are lacking an understanding. I even mentioned this before too. You can use a conventional 3 axis mill as a lathe. With a mill, and a creative and intelligent operator, you can do a lot with it. This is how we are able to get to where we are today through years of R&D, way before we even had 3D printers.

You can hold your workpiece on your spindle. You attach cutting tools to the stage. Your mill becomes a lathe. This is routinely done in the industry and home shops.

And plus, if you need someone you can design, engineering and build it yourself. You can make your own spindle assembly easily. You dont need to buy everything. How do you think the first milling machine spindle was built? Its sort of the chicken and the egg analogy. Well, everything was done manually at first, then you get the first working machine, which you use to make a better next generation and so goes that evolution. See, replication way before the days of reprap.

Quote
nophead
Reprap is a replicator in the sense that it makes all the parts that you cannot buy cheaply off the shelf and would otherwise require another machine or some human labour and skill to make. The fact it doesn't make nuts and bolts and stepper motors means it technically falls way short of self replication, but practically it doesn't matter because you can buy such things cheaper and better than you can make them.

The point is that if reprap wants to be even remotely considered as capable of being self reliant in production (not replication), it needs to have its entire design reliant only on things printed, this includes linear ways etc. And if you use plastic printed ways, the precision gets even worse, which will be one step back for reprap. And then the next generation of parts printed from those will get less precision but have moved towards true self reliance (again not replication).

But then the point also is, a good operator of a milling machine, can essentially make many of the parts the machine needs, including screw drivers, screws, threads on the nuts etc. Now, a reprap 3D printer can print threaded components and screws and screw drivers also. The difference here is the material choice and also the precision from which the parts are printed. THis is the distinction between true bottom line capabilities of milling machines vs FDM printers. THe reality is, the engineering world has preferred and often required the use of metals and it needs to be with a certain precision. This is not as easily achievable with 3D printers. For example, you cant produce a ultra high vacuum chamber with 3D printing. You can with a milling machine whereby you are able to mill and turn stainless steel that is often used for ultra high vacuum applications.

One way to make 3D metal or ceramic parts with 3D printers is to print 'green' binder material comprised of binder and metal powder and then sinter the part. However, sintered components almost always have porosity. Again, this fact alone can mean it is not suitable for real world engineering.

Quote
nophead
No if you read any definition of self replication it does not require intelligence. Take bacteria and viruses as prolific examples.

Thats true as in bacteria and viruses etc can self replicate without intelligence. This is not a valid description for a consumer product. Your whole argument bends on the fact that you think replication means human demand and desire for a product is the reason for that product's survival and thus 'replication'. This is not the right way to use it.

If that is true, then all popular products ever created on the planet is self replicating. Iphone 4 must be characterized as self replicating then, since there is such a high demand for them.

If you want to use the analogy of viruses and bacteria, etc, then the correlation to reprap is that the reprap has to be able to ultimately survive in the wild and be able to lead to the reproduction of itself sometime in the future if it was just thrown out in the wild for an unknown period of time and something picks it up (in this case a human perhaps, and obviously). There is the question of operator knowledge and capability. Just picking up some machine doesnt mean it will be used itnelligently or as intended. Nor does it mean the machine will even work. Then again, whatever the scenario used to validate reprap in your argument, those same points can be made about CNC millling machines. Their popularity too will keep them alive.

Quote
nophead
Yes it is a tool for humans to use. That is why people want them.

Yes but that makes a massive difference. You tell the machine to start and then leave it to get on with it while you do something else. Manual tools need time, effort, and in a lot of cases skill. They are also expensive and take up a lot of room because you need a small workshop to be able to hand make the variety of things you can print with a 3D printer. Very few people have enough tools to make things, they just buy them.

Whether you like it or not repraps are popular and they replicate, proof is tens of thousands of people now poses them, and they have caught the attention of the media. In that respect they are different from everything that has gone before. Get over it. If you prefer CNC routers and lathes go troll cnczone.com.

These types of DIY 3D printers are mostly popular with the computer geek, hacker space, facebook tweeting crowd. It is a consumer product. A successful product or company doesnt have to be consumer goods, nor does being a sucessful consumer good mean it is the most successful in life. Just look at Oracle. No consumer uses them. Businesses use them. Super successful. In the same token, CNC milling machines will remain popular among real engineering/production/R&D crowd because its the proper way to engineer and manufacture things for at least the foreseeable future.

Anyway it seems to me that reprap crowd support the project and believe its special in the way it manufactures things, when really they should be wanting to believe in 'additive manufacturing' in general and not FDM specifically. Additive manufacturing has a future in true engineering applications and probably before you know it FDM will not grow as big as you think and remain in the 'consumer' grade product crowd. Additive machining has a real future in real world engineering but that will be the real and better techniques like optical based techniques to control solidification (e.g. with a laser) or say electron beam or ion beam assisted deposition. These sorts of techniques are capable of ultra-fast and ultra precise manufacturing of parts and are based on the additive philosophy as opposed to milling which is based on material removal. With electron and ion beam deposition techniques you can create 3D features in the order or nanometers. On the other hand, FDM is slow and imprecise and requires mechanics to move a print head. With those techniques (i.e. mechanical kinematic stage), a CNC milling machine always reigns supreme in manufacturing to precision. In the scene of additive manufacturing, directed beam assisted solidification or deposition techniques have high precision and very little if any moving parts. E.g. the control of an ion/electron beam is done with ion optics, which have no moving parts, but are able to be controlled to nanoscale precision.

Quote

julianh72 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @TTYlater:
> Do you accept that a virus is self-replicating?
> Because if you do, than RepRap is
> self-replicating; if not, then we are never going
> to meet on common ground.
>
> Characteristics of a virus:
> A virus is a small infectious agent that can
> replicate only inside the living cells of
> organisms. ... About 5,000 viruses have been
> described in detail, although there are millions
> of different types. ... Viruses are found in
> almost every ecosystem on Earth and are the most
> abundant type of biological entity. ... Some
> viruses including those causing AIDS and viral
> hepatitis evade these immune responses and result
> in chronic infections. Antibiotics have no effect
> on viruses, but several antiviral drugs have been
> developed. ... Viruses are an important natural
> means of transferring genes between different
> species, which increases genetic diversity and
> drives evolution.
>
>
>
> A virus is incapable of existing and
> self-reproducing alone "in the wild" - it survives
> and reproduces by subverting the chemistry and
> biology of the cells of the host organism for its
> own reproduction. It doesn't even carry all of the
> chemical "raw material" that it needs to reproduce
> - it gets almost all of the "stuff" it needs to
> reproduce from the host. It may be injurious (or
> even fatal) to the host - it doesn't care, as long
> as enough new viruses are produced before the host
> dies, and as long as new hosts can be found, then
> the virus will propagate. Some viruses survive and
> propagate though a symbiotic relationship with the
> host; for example, converting waste products into
> useful constituent chemicals. In essence, it is
> the DNA of the virus that self-replicates (albeit
> with mutations) - the virus "package" and the host
> are just the vectors used to reproduce the DNA of
> the virus.
>
> RepRap has "gone viral" in every sense of the
> word:
>
> Characteristics of a RepRap:
> A RepRap is a small infectious machine that can
> replicate only inside the mind of hosts. ... About
> 50 RepRaps have been described in detail, although
> there are thousands of different types. ...
> RepRaps are found in almost every ecosystem on
> Earth and are the most abundant type of domestic
> 3D printer. ... Some RepRaps result in chronic
> infections. Wives / Husbands / Significant Others
> have no effect on RepRaps, and no anti-RepRap
> drugs have been developed. ... RepRaps are an
> important means of transferring design ideas
> between different species of RepRap, which
> increases genetic diversity and drives evolution.
>
>
>
> A RepRap is incapable of existing and
> self-reproducing alone "in the wild" - it survives
> and reproduces by subverting the mind and wallet
> of the host organism for its own reproduction. It
> doesn't even carry all of the physical "raw
> material" that it needs to reproduce - it gets the
> "vitamins" it needs to reproduce from the host
> (and the local hardware shop). It may be injurious
> (or even fatal) to the host - it doesn't care, as
> long as enough new RepRaps are produced before the
> host dies (or loses interest), and as long as new
> hosts can be found, then RepRap will propagate.
> Some RepRaps survive and propagate though a
> symbiotic relationship with the host; for example,
> converting plastic filament into useful objects.
> In essence, it is the DNA of the RepRap that
> self-replicates (albeit with mutations) - the
> RepRap "machine" and the host are just the vectors
> used to reproduce the DNA of RepRap.
>

If that is true, then all successful products are self replicating. Iphone 4 perhaps? Oh right, Iphone 4 doesnt have manufacturing capability. Ok so I will focus on popular workshop tools. How about the Dremel? The Dremel is a hugely popular consumer product because it can do light drilling and cutting for stuff around the house.

Well a dremel is really no different than what a reprap means to the consumer. They are both tools capable of being used to make or do modifications to other stuff. Both are incapable of making all of its own parts.

But there is one difference about the dremel vs reprap. Its automation. The difference is reprap is computer numerically controlled and the dremel on its own is not. Otherwise, its not inconceivable for someone to make another dremel with a dremel, the same way someone can make a reprap with a reprap. Both will need to purchase parts it cant make itself. For example, the person making the dremel will need to buy the motors and battery I'd assume unless he is an amazing craftman/engineer. And the reprapper will need to buy steppers, controller boards, metal rods, bushings, etc. Both will need raw material of course, e.g. dremel guy needs plastic and metals to work on, and reprapper needs plastic filaments.

Again, the only difference is automation. Reprap is automated, the dremel is not. Both require a human operator. Ok, so the manufacturing philosophy is different, one is additive by extruding plastic and the other makes parts by removing stuff. But their purpose for the user is similar, both can be used as tools for production.

So with your philosophy, is the dremel self replicating then?

Quote

> Stone hammers don't exist for the purpose of
> making more stone hammers; lathes don't exist to
> make other lathes; CNC Mills don't exist to make
> other CNC Mills; the vast majority of tools are
> invented in order to make other things. But herein
> lies the distinction - it is of the very essence
> of RepRap that a prime purpose of its existence is
> to self-reproduce - as well as to make "useful
> stuff" for the host.

This seems to be a common problem. People are unclear about the facts. Even wtihin this thread, at least some have now conceded that old tools can make similar or newer better tools. This has been the reality of our existence and the reason behind our human technological progress. So your points here are completely false. Historically CNC mills/lathes can and do make parts for itself. Not being aware of this, does not make it untrue. From that perspective, reprap is not special in this front, since it is also just another line of tools used by the operator to perform tasks of manufacturing. The only difference is its 'consumer grade'.

kyleeamonahern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lol!! maybe this dude is working for some company,
> and the open source 3d printer threatens its
> monopoly, so he is either trying to waist our time
> or change our minds about the reprap so we spend
> our resources on something else. At this point I
> dont understand why else he would be keeping this
> up! lol

This is ignorance talking. Are you the same type that believe defense attornies are the enemies because they defend the accused and serve their important and required role as an adversary in our rule of law? Are you the type that hates attorneys that defend casey anthony or oj simpson?

Here Im telling it like it is. I own a 3D printer too. I use linux primarily, but I dont say windows suck unlike many. And then I will probably turn to the CNC mill crowd after this and tell them why CNC milling machines suck compared to 3D printers. The truth is the truth, Im just telling it like it is without being blinded by idealogy.

You don't seem to be able to grasp the meaning of "self replication". Since this is a forum about self replication machines there is little point in you posting in it until you are able to understand it and differentiate it from manufacturing and fabricating.

You cannot make another Dremel with a Dremel. You could use it as the spindle on a router and make the case and buy a motor and some bearings but you would need a lathe to make shaft. Nobody buys a Dremel and then starts churning them out.

I have a mill / lathe combo and it cannot make parts for itself, other than perhaps a miniature model, when in the hands of a craftsman. It cost about twice the price when you include all the accessories and is only suitable for use in a workshop.

In contrast, starting with one repstrap I now have it and four repraps and they have made parts for more than 500 others. Many of those have made others and so on. If you look at eBay you will find dozens of people selling reprap parts, printed by repraps. Reprap is replicating and that is what makes it unique.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

TTYlater Wrote:
> I use linux primarily, but I dont say windows
> suck unlike many.

> And then I will probably turn to
> the CNC mill crowd after this and tell them why
> CNC milling machines suck compared to 3D printers.

> The truth is the truth, Im just telling it like it
> is without being blinded by idealogy.


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!
Please, somebody, make him stop!!!!!

---

Follow my Mendel Prusa build here: [julianh72.blogspot.com]

TTYlater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [...]And then I will probably turn to
> the CNC mill crowd after this and tell them why
> CNC milling machines suck compared to 3D printers.

Why do i get the feeling that you got to reprap forums after being already chased away from some other machinist forum for opinions just similar to these?

Looks like a Troll to me...

---

Bob Morrison
Wörth am Rhein, Germany
"Luke, use the source!"
BLOG - PHOTOS - Thingiverse

Quote
TTYlater
This seems to be a common problem. People are unclear about the facts. Even wtihin this thread, at least some have now conceded that old tools can make similar or newer better tools. This has been the reality of our existence and the reason behind our human technological progress. So your points here are completely false. Historically CNC mills/lathes can and do make parts for itself. Not being aware of this, does not make it untrue. From that perspective, reprap is not special in this front, since it is also just another line of tools used by the operator to perform tasks of manufacturing. The only difference is its 'consumer grade'.

I notice you've upgraded your status from annoyance to troll since my last intervention, well done.

Your premise that you can somehow prove that RepRap is no more special than CNC machines or lathes is false. Regardless of whether RepRap is different or not, you cannot prove this and nobody can. Language is totally inadequate to formulate any such proof.

There are people who think RepRap is wonderful. There are people who grasp the aspect of self-replication in the RepRap designs. I am one of them. These people might be delusional or not but nobody can prove either way.

Being left without facilities to formulate proof for your premises you are dissing RepRap despite your claims to the contrary. Re-iterating your points of view will not undo your negative rhetoric towards RepRap. This community welcomes everybody including you to share their opinions. You will probably not stop your dismissal and we will allow you to continue. You seem to believe you are entitled to join this community in order to dismiss it. We will all have to learn to live with your arrogance.

TTYLater does have a point. A reprap is similar to a mdf cnc machine, as both can make some of their structural parts. Also both need similar off the shelf parts to be truly useful. ie. motors, linear motion parts and a form of head.

I suppose what could be special is that the design hides this fact.

Say Nopheads repstrap was made of mdf, havent seen it, then he could use this to make other restraps. Is it self replicating?

HydraRaptor is not self replicating, which is why it is a repstrap (and it can also mill), but the machines I have printed with it are self replicating, so they are repraps.

Yes you can make a self replicating CNC router using MDF and threaded rods with a similar proportion of parts to a reprap but there is a big difference between the capabilities of such a router and a 3D printer and the router will be pretty poor compared to a proper commercial machine whereas repraps can outperform commercial FDM machines.

Where is the big community of people making self replicating routers? I suggest there isn't one because they much less appeal to the general public. With a 3D printer you press a button and it makes any object from a reel of plastic with negligible waste and no skill required by the operator (once the machine has been built and calibrated). It can exist in a domestic environment.

In contrast a router is noisy and dusty. You need a stock of sheet materials and there is significant waste. You have to mount materials and change bits, etc. To make complex shapes you need to remount the object in different orientations and index it correctly, so more labour and skill is required to operate one.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

But wasnt the point that self replication is nothing new? In that case you have made the argument that this is correct in the second paragraph. How well it works is not the issue.

Saying that I used a mdf cnc machine to build the sumpod prototype. It is quite possible to change some aspects on the original machine so that it could be quite a good 3d printer as well with a 500mm sq build area, and a excellent cnc router. Two machines for the price of one.

The question is ": Whats special about the goal of 'reprap' vs existing capabilities/realities like CNC milling machines?" The answer is it is the first self replicating 3D printer. 3D printers can make more shapes than subtractive machines, waste less material, are easier to use and can operate in a domestic environment because they are quieter and cleaner.

A good router is never going to be the best 3D printer and vice versa. Routers are slow to for FFF, and repraps are not stiff enough to mill. If comes down to the difference between belts and leadscrews. State of the art repraps are moving at 100's of mm/s. That allows very small layer heights to be used without taking a ridiculous time to build anything.

Quote

Saying that I used a mdf cnc machine to build the sumpod prototype.

Yes but a sumpod can't make itself so it is not self replicating. The difference is that when people buy one from you they can't make another. When they buy repraps they can make more, and many do so. That is why there are so many of them around now and also why there are so many variations.

This is what TTYLater cannot grasp. Of course CNC machines can make parts for other CNC machines but that is conventional manufacturing, not self replication.

Yes one can conceive it is possible to build a self replicating router from MDF and threaded rods, but has anybody actually done it and is there a community of people replicating them?

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

Regards the SUMPOD it may not make itself but it can make a reprap any size and mill the electronics. Self replication wasn't more important than being solid and multifunctional.
Also the point I was making was that ttylater was correct when he said self replication isn't new as confirmed by what you said above.
I remember talking to you in Sheffield at the reprap meet. What would you say is a better machine your reprap or repstrap?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2011 12:40PM by progomez.

It was accurate, but very slow compared to my other machines. It was also very noisy. It is broken at the moment, and since I didn't make the XY table I don't know how or if I am able to mend it. In contrast I can mend any my repraps since I know exactly how they are made and can either print or buy cheaply any of the parts.

If self replicating isn't new, where are the large numbers of non reprap, self replicating machines? Because repraps are replicating their growth is outstripping all the repstraps.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

some on cnczone self replicate.

i personally think self replication is a hindrance sometimes as a good few build a reprap just to make money building repraps. Also regards cost, most still is in the other parts.

regards your cnc if it were mdf then it could probably fix itself.

The big question is whether the eventual home 3d printer in most homes look like a reprap, up or makerbot? Will the reprap stay in the tinkerer sphere?

progomez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> i personally think self replication is a hindrance
> sometimes as a good few build a reprap just to
> make money building repraps.

This argument has gone completely circular:

Q: What makes RepRap special?
A: The fact that it is self-replicating.

Q: But can't all tools self-replicate?
A: Up to a point - but RepRap was CONCEIVED specifically so that it could - and would - self-replicate; now look at how many are out there, proving that it DOES self-replicate! (Where is the comparable community of self-replicating CNC-Millers, sharing their easy and affordable CNC-Mill designs and parts? I have hankered for a "3D Printer" of ANY kind for many years; I would have happily built a CNC-Mill if the plans and parts for an affordable design were readily available. RepRap was the first practical and affordable choice for me.)

Q: Self-replication is a hindrance - some people just build them so they can sell RepRap parts to other people so they can build RepRaps.
A: Yes, this is what self-replication means! It is not a requirement that EVERY RepRapper has to make "other stuff"; all that matters is that the machine CAN make "other stuff", and the machine self-replicates widely so that other people - many other people - can access them to make "other stuff".

In terms of useful dialogue, I think it might be time to close this thread!

I will probably continue continue to chime in every now and then, because I enjoy a good argument.

As Monty Python explained, there is (or isn't) a distinction between an argument and simple contradiction:

M: An argument isn't just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn't.
M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A: Yes it is!
M: No it isn't!

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2011 06:39PM by julianh72.

---

Follow my Mendel Prusa build here: [julianh72.blogspot.com]

My point was should the goal of an open source 3d printer be the best and maybe cheapest 3d printer? I always thought that the hot end was always the most important part of a reprap. No point being able to replicate something that has a flaw.

Reprap is as self replicating as many other machines that can make a few of their parts. So its not really self replicating. Although reprappers don't like that argument either.

Although the prusa mendel was going the right way for self replication, now people are using linear bearings its even less self replicating. All thats needed now is aluminium pulleys and proper leadscrews, not too expensive.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2011 08:14AM by progomez.

Yes, you have some good points and this is mentioned in many areas on the reprap site already. Search the forum for my posts "thoughts on a truly practical printer" or something like that I forget the exact title, where I talk about this.

Basically it is not about qualitative differences so much as quantitative. The capital costs of the set of production equipment you want has to go down. Flexible fabrication facilities and fab labs are more in this vein, like giant printers that take a whole building up and require substantial manual intervention but only use existing technology. They might be made largely self reproducing.

In the end we must admit that additive fabrication is interesting but there is nothing fundamentally that special about it. It has it's place and like any other process has it's pros and cons.

Self replication is very useful maybe even critical for keeping costs down hopefully, but that's the main point IMO.

>
> Self replication is very useful maybe even
> critical for keeping costs down hopefully, but
> that's the main point IMO.


That's the problem, for a long time self replication didn't have any effect on cost because the cost of peoples time kept the reprap expensive.

My thought now is that it may be possible, given the clonedel process, to make a reprap easy to manufacture and at less than £199 in the next few months. No reason for the price going up.

At the moment my time is spent cutting, packing and trying to make the SUMPOD the best it can be, and should be, but keeping the price low, especially given the parts, to approx £399.

But having looked at all the options a cheaper reprap may be on the cards. It wont be a sumpod because the frame is not strong enough to be multi functional, but it should take what ive learnt making the sumpod regards manufacturing, and by simplifying mechanics further, and by cutting the parts needed in the hotend it should be possible. Maybe even a version of the mendel.

More machines means more brains making the technology better.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2011 09:30PM by progomez.

Here is an interesting video I came across. Its about CNC milling machines fabricating parts for CNC milling machines in a manufacturing/production environment for one of the world's leading CNC machine manufacturers, Haas. This factory is exuding all that reprap is trying to do in terms of 'self replication'.

[www.youtube.com]

I think overall, reprappers are not familiar or confused with the terminologies being used in general, such as 'replication', automation', etc - and that is where a lot of the confusion is comming from.

If someone thinks reprap is more capable than CNC milling machines in terms of their ability to self replicate, it demonstrates misunderstanding. If someone argues reprap is different than a dremel in terms of their ability to be used for self replication, it demonstrates misunderstanding. The difference is reprap is 'automated' and a dremel is not - but to the end user they are no different in their role, and it is a tool for manufacturing for the human operator. Again, automation is the key difference in their purpose. In terms of technical differences between a milling machine and a reprap FDM, the difference is in their philosophy for fabrication, but it doesnt not change their ability to be used to self replicate. AGain their purpose to the end user is similar, just the technical details are different.

The only reason why 'reprap' is so called 'replicating' is purely in its marketing and community base. This is the only novelty in reprap. Nothing in its technology or philosophy is novel, only in its marketing and community that keeps it one of their goals to so called 'replicate' these machines. With the same community for CNC machines, they can achieve somethign similar. Actually, manufacturers actually do this for CNC machines, its just that the general public doesnt. You see, Haas automation, or any other CNC manufacturer does exactly the same thign in terms of using their machines to build their machines.

I also agree with Progomez. What will be best for reprap, is if its users realize where reprap stands. It is important for people leading this project to have a clear view and perspective. If you dont have a clear outlook of what reprap really is and where it stands and fits into the bigger world of technology, you wont be able to take this project very far. So I agree with Progomez on one of his points, one of the key advantages of reprap is not the replication part. Its the cost part. Focus on that. Drop the 'replication' part because its not even true (reprap isnt really novel in this regard no matter how much you want to disagree with this point). Focus on making it low cost, focus on making it high quality, it may not necessarily need to self-replicate, but if cost is down and performance is high, it becomes a real contender against commercial FDM printers and even the high cost alternatives like makerbot et al.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/23/2011 04:39PM by TTYlater.

@TTYlater:

Yes, OK, we get it!

But where is the community of tens of thousands of CNC Millers who are making copies of their CNC Mills, distributing the plans, upgrading the designs incrementally, milling parts for other would-be CNC Millers who are just getting into it - AND making useful "stuff" (as well as some not-so-useful "stuff"!)?

If / when the CNC Milling (or any other RP technology for that matter!) community grows exponentially because it becomes a viable way for people with no particular technical skills (other than hobbyist level dexterity and a REALLY basic toolkit) to build their own RP machine for a few hundred dollars, and design and make their own "stuff" at next to no cost - THEN I will grant that those other RP technologies are "equivalent" to the RepRap phenomenon. Until that day arrives - THAT is what makes RepRap special!

---

Follow my Mendel Prusa build here: [julianh72.blogspot.com]

Quote

If someone argues reprap is different than a dremel in terms of their ability to be used for self replication, it demonstrates misunderstanding.

No it is you that does not understand what "self replication" means. Go find a dictionary.

Quote

Drop the 'replication' part

The reprap project and this forum is about a self replicating machine. If you are not interested in that go find another project and forum.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

It's one of the first steps foretold by the new church of the singularity. We make our machines reproduce then they take over. At least as far as their firmware takes them haha. Honestly anyone who fears robots taking over anytime soon hasn't programmed a robot.

On a more serious tangent, CNCs have been able to make some of their own parts for a while, but they didn't. Now we're using CNC like machines to make CNC like machines. The technology itself isn't novel, but very very few technologies nowadays are. The application is novel though.

For example, we can agree people have been using bubble wrap for packaging for quite a while now. You could use it for other things, sure, but nobody did (besides blowing out your friends ear drums...). Then someone comes along and starts making designer dresses out of it. It's a novel application which counts in my book (and as a grad student I'd say my view is academic enough haha).

---

Chris Sketch
Ann Arbor, MI
blog.chrissketch.com

We’re here to put a dent in the universe. Otherwise why else even be here?
—Steve Jobs