User:Gaz5013

From RepRap
Revision as of 04:42, 12 December 2012 by Gaz5013 (talk | contribs) (Blog 16 Bonus Thanksgiving Blog)
Jump to: navigation, search

Graham Zimmerman - Senior - Mechanical Engineering - Penn State University

Graham.jpg








Blog 16 Bonus Thanksgiving Blog

Write about something that interests you, related to the subject of 3D printing, which we have not covered in the course.

To be honest, I watched a video about a company that is developing a desktop 3D printer, which they think will retail at about 500-1000 dollars. Here is the link: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1650950769/l5-3d-a-stylish-and-affordable-3d-printer?play=1&ref=search. After seeing something like this, I was amazed. I came into this 3D printing class with a very high interest in something that was "cool". However, now that I am a week out of ending the course, it has truly inspired me to not only work with 3D printers for my career, but build my own 3D printer/RepRap soon. I love designing different things on SolidWorks and similar programs, so with the technology to hold my design in my hand at Penn State, for one of my courses, is just astonishing. I think the idea of having a desktop or household 3D printer sparks my interest. Also, getting people who know very little about 3D printing interested is another hobby I am sharing with a ton of people around campus. I am personally very interested in helping to develop the 3D printers enough that low end printers costing around 500 dollars, instead of 2,700 dollars like Makerbot is selling their new Replicator2 at. To have my personal 3D printer to mess around with and design useful things for different applications is something that I cannot get off my mind. Another subject that really sparks my interest that we have not covered in this course is the idea of how it is affecting companies and manufacturing. We might have touched on it briefly, but the fact that, as an employee of a company, you can take develop a product in a couple months and then actually try it out in production before you spend millions on it, is incredible. Even this summer, I worked for a company, TE Connectivity, and I made a design for a tool. It took me about 2 months to fully design. However, once it was finished, I sent my design to our Rapid Prototyping center and they had a 3D printed version of my design back to me within a week or a few days. Years ago, many senior engineers told me it would take weeks if not months to get a prototype made. Now, with the exciting technology being used, like lasers, to make prototypes of steel, I cannot imagine what the future holds. I understand that this course is very focused on RepRaps and open source 3D printing, but I found it very neat to research how 3D printing is affecting companies and manufacturing. After all, many of us engineers from Penn State will go into industry, so it is extremely great to have this knowledge.

Blog 15

Watch the first section of the mother of all demos (above). Do you recognize the rough features we use on every computer today in its earliest form? Drawing comparisons between the evolution of that and the evolution of 3D printers, Doyle asks you to dream big. I want you to think about what we might try to achieve, both in the near term (cool but large ideas that we could do NOW if we had the means) and the long term (cool ideas which require developments in tech which don’t currently exist, ala sci fi).

Professor Richard Doyle brought up several important points in his presentation to a class last semester. I think the RepRap project here at Penn State is very comparable to computers and similar devices today. Back 10 to 15 years ago, everyone knows what computers were like. However, people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were already thinking ahead. The computer went from something that was used by very few, to the most important technology device companies/employees/professors/students/etc. around the world use every single day to be able to function. Recently, I heard from a long-time Apple employee that Steve Jobs was discussing the idea of an Ipad back in the late 1980's. With RepRap, I see our research and redefining very similar in the 3D printing world. I think 10 years from now we will look back and laugh at how immature our printers were. That comes with any technology. Now, I am seeing companies building from others ideas, trying to make affordable desktop 3D printers, and printers that can print in multiple materials for use in production or even around the house. The cool but large idea I see in the near future, but maybe more far off is the idea of a local print service. The idea of taking a design, or buying a design online, and taking to a nearby print service to have your product quickly printed would be fantastic. Say you lose the back to the remote, or it somehow breaks. You could go on a website, pick out the correct back to that remote and have it printed immediately. I know that does not seem like the most important feature, but think about a car. Say something breaks, and you have no where near the amount of money to buy a part that costs over 1,000 dollars. How exciting would it be to be able to print out that part and put it on your car immediately? Therefore, I think the idea of having local print shops all over the country would be amazing. In addition, the accommodation of every family having their own 3D printer in their household would be amazing, but seems very far off. First of all, the company who makes this universal 3D printer would have to make it simply enough for everyone to use, as well as very affordable to everyone. I think the idea of having a printer to print out something a family needs for their house, with good quality and material, would be the ideal situation. I mean, I'm sure 15 years ago nobody thought that close to everyone in the United States would have a cell phones, or even a computer in every house for that matter. And look, today almost everyone can afford it, and needs one to be productive in some way. Overall, I think the RepRap community is guiding the path to really advancing 3D printing developments. The filament recycler idea is another huge step in the right direction. Although I am usually for closed source things, I am actually very happy that RepRap is open source. I think this lets the huge 3D printing community really build on top of each others ideas, and advance developments a lot faster than they would be if it were closed source.

I thought the idea of the computer mouse was very interesting in the "Mother of All Demos". It is funny how today we take so much for granted, and still complain about the little inconvenient things that "hold us back" from getting work done. I thought it was interesting to learn that people had to strictly use keyboards before the idea of a mouse came along. I think the same thought process can be applied to the RepRaps. Think about making software that would replace Skeinforge, Pronterface and Replicator G, which would do all that in one step? Think about somehow printing with materials other than PLA, or waiting hours for a single extruder to print out a part. What if we had extruders that would build from the side of the object as well as the top, or 5 different extruders on top of the object, speeding up the process by hours. If the process would speed up, we could print out 5 more printers in one days. I think this goes to show that the possibilities for the RepRap are endless, just like personal computers today. The story about the mouse really got my mind thinking outside of the box in reference to RepRaps.

Blog 14

This video by Dr. Doctorow was very interesting to listen to. General computers have changed the face of the earth. The internet, social media and general computers have changed the way we connect with people around us, and have significantly impacted the amount of technology available to the average person. However, with all the good the new technology brings with it, there is always the negative aspects. Many companies are worried about intellectual property and protecting their property through their own methods. However, the idea of limiting computers to perform only certain tasks is a topic that arises. Dr. Doctorow discusses that video game systems are a good of example of this, because they are made to do one thing, and are creating a huge profit for their companies. As time goes on, and everything starts to become more and more digital and technologically sound, it might be hard to keep track of how much power our devices have. A good example of this the future of cars, and the idea that one day our cars might drive us around instead of people driving. The prompt for this blog asks if, personally as the "driver" of my first self-driving car, I would like to have locked or unlocked firmware, so that I could or could not keep track of what my car was actually doing. I am really stuck between both ideas. I would absolutely not want my car to have complete control over where I am driving and/or driving me past a McDonald's even though it is a long route to my destination. On the other hand, I would not want the code to be open source to every good/bad guy out there. I think that would get really complicated. While it is possible to jailbreak pretty much any device you buy, I think giving people complete unlocked access to the firmware would create a lot of chaos and lead to a lot of "gray areas" like open source 3D printing. While that would be idea for a lot of engineers and people that love to jailbreak things, I believe in closed source, and letting companies make the profit they deserve for coming up with their products. However, although I am all for the closed source and locked firmware idea, I would not want my car driving me past McDonald's on purpose, or actually any of my devices to have more power than I do. If asked by the UN to develop some sort of regulatory framework for 3D printing, I would really have to do a lot of research into all the "gray areas" of 3D printing. I would tell them that it is an extremely complicated process and might take a very long time. To be honest, the copyright war is just so complicated right now. I am not sure if it can be one. Either way, you are going to step on the toes of someone when trying to make peace with the copyright war. I think the basis to fixing the copyright war is to lay down rules. Once rules are laid out by the government, or whoever controls the copyright war, people have to abide by them. I think that is where you start, but I really do not have a specific way I would solve the war, or see a nearby solution.

Blog 13

Do any of the designs above seem more suitable than the others?

I think the Filabot seems to look like the best option when comparing it to the rest of the recyclable prototypes, but they did not give a video or demonstration of the Filabot. Therefore, I am a bit skeptical on how far along they are in the process of having a consistent prototype. However, the design is very compact and already made 8 ft of filament off of milk jugs and detergent bottles laying around the house. In comparison, the other designs, including the RecycleBot, still seem to be too complicated.

What kind of influence might a recycling system have on the DIY RepRap community?

I believe the recycling system will actually have a large impact on the RepRap community. To have to the opportunity to recycle all the waste that is created from each RepRap would be incredible. I think everyone in the community would invest in this, because it would save a lot of waste, as well as money. Also, it would help the community in creating a "green" like image, which people always like to hear about. If the engineers that are designing these machines could make these designs into more compact, easy to use machines, I believe the community would invest heavily. For instance, the 312 classroom at Penn State has at least 4 boxes of waste from all the 3D printers. Right there, we could turn that into something very valuable.

Does building a filament recycler sound difficult to you, even with step by step guides?

Well, considering building a 3D printer sounds very complex to me at the beginning of the semester, I think the filament recycler is very comparable. I think with enough research and custom design, Penn State could start making their own recyclers, and maybe even improve the design. Personally, I think the heating aspects of the filament recycler would be hard to figure out, but I definitely think this would be doable. As in the videos, I can tell it is students just like us who are messing around with the idea of building a filament recycler. Therefore, if we assigned a team to making one, I think it could absolutely be put together in a few months!

Blog 12

This blog is in response to an article about personal 3D printed models. These models are actually based off of real-life 3D scanned pictures of people.

What’s your impression of this use of 3D printing technology?

I think this technology is mind blowing for people who are not up to date on 3D printing. Typically in New York City, everyone walks into the Apple store and is amazed by all of their "simplistic" technology. I think this Makerbot store completely blows them out of the water. If I could walk into that store and get my head printed for only 25 dollars, I would absolutely do it. I think this technology is something amazing for most people. However, I am not sure that it is practical to think that everyone would rush to get all their pictures 3D printed. I think having digital pictures is much more convenient than 3D models. I think this technology is appropriate for people who are fascinated with 3D technology, or for people who would like something out of the ordinary. However, I still do not think this type of 3D printing technology will become something the every day consumer will want day to day. Overall, I think this technology is awesome for leisure and fun 3D printing. If the technology was used for research and scanning more serious pictures rather than self-portrait 3D models, then I think it would be more effective.

Would you buy a model of yourself? Would your parents buy one?

I would absolutely buy a model of myself! Even for 25 to 50 dollars, I would love to have one of those self-replicated models. I think they would also be awesome presents for different people. (As far as models of those people, not of myself!). My parents would probably do the same, especially my dad who is very impressed with new technology like this.

Explain the merits (or lack thereof) in this business model.

As I mentioned in the first response in this blog, I believe this technology would be great for leisure/fun. I mean, how awesome would it be to go into a photo booth at the local mall and get a 3D printed model of yourself after you take a few pictures? If this technology would evolve into something like that, then I think it would be a moderately success business model. If companies would have stores like the Makerbot store in NYC, I think this could take off, and would be something that people would be into purchasing for a while. However, as I said before, I think this technology should be adapted into the industrial/business world, with companies investing to make this technology better. I think this technology would earn a lot more money and could be incorporated into several more products to gain popularity in the business world. Overall, I see this technology directed more for leisure, rather than focusing on making money out of it. I think people will absolutely be interested in buying these models, but for how long I'm not sure.

How much might competition drive down prices in the future?

Competition will always drive down the price. This technology will advance rapidly within the next few years, with new companies coming up with faster and more efficient ways to print out models of people, as well as other models. I think this technology will be "basic" compared to what researchers come up with in the next few years. I see these models costing 10 to 15 dollars, and might even become something everyone has due to the rapid evolution of 3D printers today. For example, in my spare time, I am reading up on companies that are making desktop 3D printers that will be very simple to use, and cost around 500 dollars in comparison to the latest 2,700 Makerbot Replicator 2. As you can see, 3D printing is being incorporated more and more every single day, and will evolve into something everyone knows about, instead of something everyone is fascinated by, like nowadays. In the same way, I think 3D models of people will be something that everyone knows about, and will turn into more of a low end business after an initial interest.

Blog 11

Even before reading these 3 articles, I have agreed that 3d printers in schools, particularly k-12 would be an excellent addition. I really agree with one of the points from the articles, which states that a couple years ago, we would have been shocked to think that our cell phones would give us breaking news, instant messaging, inter-connect us with libraries around the world and even more. Nowadays, that is just the ordinary. Similarly, today we think the same way about 3d printers. Just a couple of years ago, most people did not hear much about 3d printing, but today we hear more and more about how they are being incorporated into our daily lives, especially in the business world. However, people still think that having a 3d printer in their house to print out certain objects they cannot buy anymore is an outrage. It is the exact equivalent to the cell phone concept that I previously mentioned. Personally, I think incorporating 3d printers into K-12 classrooms would not only be a benefit to the students, but a benefit to the future of engineering. I feel like having the 3d printers would get so many more kids involved in the engineering world, and really intrigue their minds. It would be a great tool to challenge their thinking and really give them an edge going into college, more than students in college nowadays. One of the teachers in the articles challenged his 8th grade students to fix a problem for a cup holder in a 1990's car, and then had the students print out their design using a 3d printer. For the students, I am sure this was one of the highlights of their education. Personally, it is one of the most satisfying things in the world when your 3d printed design works and is in your hand. It took me until my latest internship to get that feeling, which was my junior summer of my college education. If teachers were challenging students like this all the way up until they enter college, could you imagine how amazing the future engineers will be?! They would come into college one step ahead. Their creativity and design solutions would already be advanced when they take courses like the freshman class Engineering Design 100. Basically, I'm trying to say that I think 3d printers would absolutely intrigue young people across the world. It really doesn't matter who you put a 3d printer in front of, because people automatically become interested. When I gave a demo to the freshman of the Engineering Design 100 class, they were coming up to me right and left asking questions. They thought it was "awesome". And in fact, they are. And past studies have always shown that if students are interested in what they are studying, they do ten times better. I think this could be the case in K-12 schools across the world. I think it would be the start of something amazing.

Blog 10

About 3 years ago, I heard the words "3D printing", and did not quite understand what it meant. As a freshman engineering student at Penn State University, one of my fellow engineers pointed out that an actual printer could take a file, convert it into 3D printer language, and then print it out. A few years later and I am now in a 3D printing class at Penn State University, and actually fell in love. This just goes to show how quickly the world of 3D printing is evolving. I understand that the technology has been around for a while, but it just blows my mind that the equipment is becoming available to the average person. In regards to the future of 3d printing, I think this rapid evolution of technology will follow the same path. The first big change I see in the future of 3d printing relates to disposable cameras. A few years back, you had to take your disposable camera to a store and get it developed, and later pick up your printed images. I think the 3d printing will work the same way. I believe that people will shop online for their desired item, download the CAD file for the item, and then take the file to a nearby store similar to Fed Ex Kinko's to get it printed. Basically, I think there will be a huge turnaround for 3d printed objects, starting out with simple products online that can be printed at a nearby store. Next, I see a major advancement in the medical fields. In my earlier blogs, I did not believe that 3d printing could be used for medical purposes, like organs and other transplants. However, after reading deeper into recent technology, it seems that 3d printing can be used in many different medical fields. For example, I read about how researchers at Wake Forest University are using 3d bioprinting technology to print new skin directly onto a burn victim's wound, particularly for US troops in Afghanistan. (The link for this stunning information is here: http://www.wakehealth.edu/Research/WFIRM/Bioprinting-Skin-on-Burns.htm). Also, I think pharmaceutical companies could somehow start to incorporate 3d printing into printing pills, with the right materials used to compose the pills. The third idea that is related to using 3d printing for medical reasons, is a bit out there. However, I read about how humans would react to using 3d printing to maybe print an extra arm for themselves, or add another ear on their body. It sounds crazy, but if you really think about it, if people could add an extra arm while in their daily jobs, think about how their efficiency would rise. They could literally keep typing and working on their computer as they take a coffee break. It is a really bizarre thought, but it could happen. The fourth major change would be in manufacturing. Think about all the money companies spend on making products with huge machines that are worth millions of dollars, not to mention the fact that each machine has to print a different object or product-specific part. I think high tech 3d printing machines could be incorporated into manufacturing to give companies a more versatile machine that could be told to print anything they desired. These machines could be switched in and out of production to print different parts of products or basically anything the companies would need. I am aware that most companies use forms of 3d printing to make their prototypes before they spend money on a product, but I think the 3d printing could be directly involved in making products. My last major change that I see for the future is in the households across the nation. I think 3d printers will become something that is relatively affordable, so that you can buy designs online and print out things you need at home. I understand that it would take a very large printer to do this, but I think 3d printers will be eventually incorporated into our homes, and will become as vital as the refrigerator or other household appliances. I think it will be very cost efficient for most people to print out new things they need.

Blog 9

1. Discuss the suitability of libraries as hosts for RepRaps (or other 3D printers)

It is obvious. There is just something about getting a 3D model in your hand. It sparks innovation. Ideas just flow from your mind and you start thinking above and beyond what you already thought. It is interesting. And attracts many different kinds of people. 3d printers in libraries are a great idea. Engineers of all kinds, chemistry majors, and all types of students could use the RepRaps for their projects, to present to their professors, and to stimulate their minds on different subjects, ultimately leading to top-notch innovation. I think libraries would be great hosts for RepRaps, but I also think it could get messy. Most of the articles I read through mentioned that they were using 20,000 dollar 3d printers. Therefore, these printers are made NOT to fail all the time versus the RepRap 3d printers, which tend to break consistently. With many groups of people constantly attending the library on a college campus, I think these printers would break even more, so you might need people to fix them. And as I was reading through some of the articles, it seemed that there was even a waiting list for the 3d printers already in college libraries, which means that these printers would have non-stop usage. Overall, I think the addition of 3d printers would add so much to libraries. It would help young engineers especially get into their projects, subjects and different majors. Considering I had an internship over the summer where I had to get 3D prototypes of my design for different products, I think letting college students use 3D printers in libraries would create a bridge between college and the real-world.


2. We have a number of libraries on campus, as well as the one on allen street: How many are you familiar with? Do you think any of them would be suitable for this?

I am very familiar with the main library on the Penn State Campus and the Engineering Library in Hamilton Hall. Personally, I think the availability of the RepRaps should be in the Engineering Library. Considering I have been through most of the Engineering courses here at Penn State, I think it would be valuable to the Engineers to have a 3D model of their design as they design different solutions for each of these courses. Especially in the senior design project, it would be great to have these 3D printers open to Engineers students, so that they could show future employers and professors how their solutions would work. I think the availability of RepRaps in the general library here at Penn State could get messy, with random students printing out objects that take hours and hours, just for the fun of it. While I think that would be great, there are always the people who take things too far and ruin it for everyone. I think if they needed to print something for a certain class, or had to register what they want printed, it would be beneficial in the main library though. Overall, I think starting the RepRaps in the Engineering Library as a "test" would be great. By saying that I do not want to discriminate against other students in other majors, but I see these 3D printers as most beneficial to engineering students.

Blog 8

1. Go back to your previous posts regarding DRM and control of 3D printing. Do these articles support your argument then? Do you think this technology will find a use?

I am actually really torn. I completely understand where some of these articles are coming from. In relate to weapons, I still support my viewpoint from my past blog to not let anyone print guns and other weapons as they want. I would not want a country where someone could go home at night and print off a gun, and then shoot 10 people the next day. We already have too many shootings as it is. On the other hand, like the article states, 3d printing could be used for good. For example, helping a little girl get over her crippling disability or feeding the homeless would be great. However, I just really believe in things being fair, so I'm not sure I agree with people printing their own cars, or printing their own shoes. Companies would absolutely go bankrupt if that were to happen, and our economy would lose a ton if every American started to print whatever they wanted. What would be the point of anything if you could just print anything you desired? Overall, I agree with putting restrictions on copying things and printing whatever you want. I would love to print myself a new car or a new Ipad, but I just don't that is fair.

Blog 7

1. What do you think of bio-printing? What sort of legal problems or technical problems can you foresee?

I think making organs for people would be the start of something amazing in the medical world. In movies and real life I always hear about people waiting and waiting for a new organ to stay alive. This would be amazing for people who are on that waiting list. However, I think problems would occur if these organs would fail, or actually getting them to adapt to every patients body. For example, how would you get a printed heart to move and pump? I think there could be numerous technical problems in that aspect. As far as legal problems, I think that the selling of these organs and resale of these organs could get really messy.

2. Do you think this might be extended to RepRaps for DIY bio-research?

I do not think it will be extended to RepRap for research, because I don't believe it has the capabilities in the extruders to make these precise parts/organs.

Blog 6

Being able to create optical sensing devices on demand is something new, as typically we print passive components. What kind of implications can you imagine resulting from this?

I can only imagine what would come of this exciting technology! I think Engineers will be able to use these optical sensing devices to put into more toys and replace more expensive light fixtures that were used to light things like the heart inside of the toy in the video. Also, I think many lenses and sensors could take advantage of these optical sensing devices. Companies always like things that are CHEAPER. So if this technology can replace some of the old sensors and more complex lighting fixtures, I think the implications will be great! I wish they would make this open source so that we could mess around with the optically sensing devices!

What sort of difficulty would we have in implementing light piping using our printers?

I think it would be difficult to implement light piping in our printers because I do not think the material we print with will be adequate to replicate the things Disney is doing. Obviously they have very expensive 3d printers and top notch materials to mess around with because of all the money they have in their technology. I also think that we would run into problems when it comes to detailing out the inside of the prints for light piping. I think it would be hard to get that kind of detail into the middle of the 3d models with a more precise extruder.

In what applications might you find use for these sensors (contact switches, touch sensors, accelerometers, etc)? Do you have some project in mind where these would be useful?

The first thing that came to my mind when I was watching the sensor demonstration during the video was cheap video games for kids. Actually, I think if this sensor technology really grew, I think it could be useful in video game systems for many applications. Aside from video games, I think many companies could use this technology in many different products they are building. I think it would make their projects cost less, which is their number one concern, or their bosses concern! Lastly, I think these sensors could be used in many different remotes for different things.

Blog 5

1) Imagine that you were a dedicated member of the DIY gun project: What might you do now?

I was a dedicated member of the DIY gun project, I would probably be upset about this set-back, but would understand the situation. I would understand that while we are testing the waters with the 3D printing of guns, it is best for the future of our project. To do things the right way, and apply for a license to print these guns is the more sensible/honest thing to do, rather than keep fighting the law and trying to find loops around things. I think it would have been harder if they actually printed a gun too, because I feel like the ATF would have confiscated that too, with even harsh consequences.


2) Another article asks ”Should 3D printing, especially when it’s being used to create items like guns, be regulated? Can you regulate it?” Check your Blog #3 Questions 1 & 3 (and my comments to them) if you haven’t already. Do you have any more to say about this issue of 3D printer regulation (gov’t or corporate)?

I really do not think I have any more to say. I still agree with the fact that it is going to be really hard to regulate what is being printed in 3D. I mean, the only reason that the ATF could see what the DIY was printing was because they were blatantly posting their information on the internet. If the ATF could not see that they were about to print real guns, how would they ever know?? I really see a huge loop hole in the legal system too. I think 3D printing is incredible, but I really don't want people printing guns, and using them whenever they want because they are only "plastic guns". I think these guns are going to get really high-tec in the near future, so I think someone, particularly government, should step in and enforce rules on 3D printing.


3) Guns (and other weapons) seem to be prone to prohibitions. What other 3D printable constructs might attract similar attention/derision/prohibition?

With all the shootings and crazy things happening around the country, weapons are a huge concern. In addition, I think that electronic constructs will be an issue in the future as 3d printing gets more and more high-tec. For example, if people start printing out Ipods, Apple will have a fit! Basically any construct where a company is getting ripped off or lives are in danger will be constructs that will attract a lot of attention!

Blog 4

1) Although Makerbot was open-source and very successful at doing so, they are getting close to competing with billion dollar printer companies in the future. If they are innovating and investing in R&D, I really don't see the problem with them seeking to protect their intellectual property from being 100% copied. I mean, maybe Makerbot Industries is keeping the product closed source until they can secure the large investment of creating the Replicator 2.

2) I feel like when Prusa put his things on Thingiverse, he thought that the open source 3D printing from Makerbot was great. However, now that Makerbot is closed source and trying to make money, I think he is truly upset, especially after Makerbot said that everything that everyone posted on Thingiverse is now their property. I feel like he expected to get a little more out of Thingiverse due to his early contributions. So, that is why I think he is going to Github. To get away from this profit-seeking company and Thingiverse and try to continue his love for open source printing.

3) I actually do think we should start looking for another Thingiverse, maybe even Github. I think it is a bit ridiculous to claim ownership of all the designs on there that people came up with. For example, I was reading through the comments on the website where this story was shared and I came across this: http://www.thingiverse.com/dutchmogul. Apparently designed this game himself, and plans on selling this game in the near future. However, with Makerbot taking ownership on Thingiverse, they can now print his game and make a profit off of this guys design. I think that is wrong, even though I'm unsure why this guy would post his design on Thingiverse if he is going to try and sell his game. Overall, I think we need to find another Thingiverse, because Makerbot claiming ownership of everything on it is a bit much.

Blog 3

It seems that 3D printing isn’t going to disappear, but the exact nature in which it will develop is not well defined. On that note, we currently place restrictions (DRM) onto our media to control distribution, with limited ‘success’. Do you think this might be applied to 3D printing? How or why not?

I'm not sure that it is plausible to control what people print. With the restrictions on media and music, I feel like it is slightly easier to control because everything is shared over the internet and other similar methods. However, with 3D printing, I feel like people could print out replications of many different products. With this being said and technology increasing in 3D printing day by day, I think there will be restrictions put on the distribution of products, especially if someone is completely stealing a companies ideas or replicating their products and selling them. I think there should be a restriction on what people can print, similar to copyright infringement. However, I think it will be hard to enforce because it would be hard to track what people are printing. If they are selling thousands of 3D printed Ipods or similar material, I think they will be caught. But, for the most part, I think the restrictions on 3D printing will be hard to enforce.


According to Bowyer, many people have a great idea (or perhaps a passion) that they love to tell people about. What is yours? Do you see this as a way to attract future mates? (or to get money?) Why/why not?

I have a great passion for the design portion of my engineering career that lies ahead. I am not sure where my life will lead me, or where I will be using my ideas, but I know that with whatever projects or products I'm assigned to design, I will enjoy doing it. Actually, it is funny that you ask if this is a way to "attract" future mates because over this last summer, I was incredibly excited to show all of my friends, and my girlfriend my design, after the company said it was "ok" to show my prototype to people outside the company. I'm not sure if I will be using my designing passion to attract mates in the future, but I know that it attracts people when you are passionate about something, and excited about your passion. That is why I chose engineering. I do, in fact, find this passion to be a way to get money. With my broad passion for design, I think that I will use this to excel with companies throughout my life.


Professor Bowyer seems to think that 3D printing will finally kill intellectual property, and he sounds pleased about it. Do you think he’s right about ending IP? Is this a good thing, a bad thing, or somewhere in-between?

I think it would be a bad thing to get end IP. While Professor Bowyer thinks that 3D printing will end intellectual property, I personally think that IP will never go away. While I think it would be nice to get away from intellectual property in some ways, I think it would destroy the idea of someone having a fantastic idea and not getting anything for it. I think people will always expect to gain something from their amazing idea, or awesome contribution to a better product. I think ending IP would take a lot of the drive away from making products and things better. However, I do not think IP will ever go away.



Blog 2

Do you think his goal of a ‘self-replicating universal constructor’ is feasible? What remains to be done to achieve this, or alternatively what would prevent such a goal?

I do not think that the 'self-replicating universal constructor' is feasible. I really don't think the electronics like the motor could be reproduced. To achieve this, I think the RepRap needs to start looking into building with different materials like metals, which from my experience in my internship over the summer, is very feasible. However, these machines and materials cost thousands and thousands of dollars. I think RepRap could start looking into other materials though!


The phrase “wealth without money” is both the title of his article and the motto of the reprap project itself. What does this phrase mean? (To him and to you if they differ). Discuss implications, problems, and possibilities associated with this idea.

The phrase means that without spending a lot of money, the reprap project can provide the necessary "wealth" to print out components and parts that break in the projects. The whole idea is that this reprap project can generate lots of products and things that can be used directly for future projects that would originally cost a good amount of money. It is wealth without spending the money!


The Darwin design was released in 2007. It is 2012 now. Imagine future scenarios for RepRaps and their ‘cousin’ 3D printing designs (Makerbots, Ultimachine, Makergear, etc.) how do you think the RepRap project (community, designs, website, anything and everything) might evolve in the future? Describe as many scenarios as you can envision.

I think that the RepRap project will evolve by completely making all the parts for other 3D printers. Also, I think that 3D printing will be used in many situations in the business world to make real parts that can be shown to customers and tested in production. Lastly, I think the Printiverse will evolve immensely and become a more professional website used by more and more people. Also, I think 3D prints will become so amazing that some of them will be directly used for selling and for use in the world.


Blog 1

1. Useful

     http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:24606
     Although this is pretty funny, this could be very useful in the backyard if you have a dog, instead of buying a poop-scooper!

2. Artistic/Beautiful

     http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:14840
     This is very detailed and artistic.  The extrusions make the chair very beautiful.

3. Pointless/Useless

     http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:22514
     These sunglasses are absolutely pointless.  They neither shade your eyes, and block your vision.  Pointless/Useless Print.

4. Funny

     http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:28270
     These Wolverine Claws are funny to play around with.  It seems they would improve a Wolverine Halloween costume.  

5. Weird

     http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:18818
     This is a pretty weird thing to print for! IClops!