@Ann – All technology comes at a high price most of the time, later when there is competition in the market the manufacturers are forced to bring down the prices for the product to survive in the market.
@78RPM - Yes model builders will definitely find this very useful; it helps them save their time. Now it's just a matter of designing the 3D model and the printer will do the rest for you, whereas sometime back you need to craft the object.
@David – I think we should give it few more days for the product to establish its self in the market and automatically the prices will fluctuate with the competition. I am sure it would not be a monopoly or oligopoly, as there are many manufactures waiting to enter into the market.
@Ann - all devices come in small sizes with same or better performance, I think the same concept applies here. 3D printer manufacturers making smaller versions of their machines with smaller build volumes that still can use complex 3D printing technologies
78RPM makes an interesting point about metals printers and service bureaus. Right now, these machines/processes and their materials are probably way too pricey for that. They were developed to serve high-end applications in industrial, military and aerospace markets, so pricing is on a very different scale from anything aimed at consumers. This is an important point to keep in mind about 3D printing/AM--there are two very different ends of the industry.
This smaller printer would be useful for model builders (including model engines) if the price is right. Of course, 3D service bureaus would be an option. I see news today that Stratasys plans to grow by acquiring companies that make 3D metals printers.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.