i agree with you, TJ, I think with the additions of some other helper devices, this could really be something professionals could leverage to make design more intuitive. I think Ann agrees with you, too, as I believe she explains in a comment. The 3D display is a great idea but you're right, those glasses are a bit clunky. But perhaps there will be some solution to replace them in the future...
TJ, the 3D shapes being outputted at this early stage are very, very simple compared to some of the more complex ones like rocket engine parts or aircraft components that DOD subcontractors and NASA are designing for 3D printing and additive manufacturing. Considering those added levels of complexity implies to me that similar added levels of complexity in gestures would be necessary.
Ann, I wouldn't call this crude at all. I can easily see this evolving into a very workable interface. But I think it will not work soley by itself. There will be something like an IPad and a keyboard to go along with it.
Boy, combine this with a really good 3-D display (though I hate the glasses necessary), and you've got a heck of a design system.
Elizabeth, like I said I think this is a great idea. For educational purposes it sounds especially useful. I'm just not convinced it will work in actualization for professional engineers because of the complexity involved.
TJ, I know how crude the 3D software was in the 1980s, since I reported the first 3D printer from 3D Systems. So this may eventually get better. All I'm pointing out is that it's crude now, and that the sophistication needed in user input may be far too complex to achieve by gestures.
I agree, TJ, this tool has a bit of a way to go before it will be ready for professional use. But it's a good start! I think cubicles are probably getting smaller, not bigger, so those grand gestures you mention just wouldn't be practical unless someone was working from home! But I think that could also be physically tiring. As you point out, we'll just have to see how it evolves.
You're right, Ann, it did seem rudimentary to me, too, at this point. But a good idea and possibly as it evolves it could become more useful to pros. I think in the early stages it's meant to be more for amateurs or hobbyists who want to design but aren't into using CAD tools.
Yes, Chuck, I'm sure maybe "anyone" is an exaggeration, but it sure seems to simplify the process. And I imagine as you point out it will be especially helpful for kids to get them going and plant the seeds as early as possible for the next generation of engineers.
In a bid to boost the viability of lithium-based electric car batteries, a team at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has developed a chemistry that could possibly double an EV’s driving range while cutting its battery cost in half.
Using Siemens NX software, a team of engineering students from the University of Michigan built an electric vehicle and raced in the 2013 Bridgestone World Solar Challenge. One of those students blogged for Design News throughout the race.
Robots that walk have come a long way from simple barebones walking machines or pairs of legs without an upper body and head. Much of the research these days focuses on making more humanoid robots. But they are not all created equal.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.