Given the amount of enthusiasm people haves shown for this project with their wallets, it seems like the world wants an affordable 3D printer. I am of the persuasion that you get what you pay for, but if a printer can be successfully developed and work well for this price point, then it's a great breakthrough for the 3D printing market. I'd have to see it to believe it, though.
I agree, Liz. You get what you pay for. But I do view this as a small step in the affordability improvements in 3D printing. At some point, I believe reliable, useful 3D printers will be affordable for the average household.
"Rylan Grayston set out to make the 3D printer a realistic product for the average household. In doing so, he was successful enough to invent his own efficient design that did not sacrifice quality of parts. The Peachy Printer is marketed to be a $100 3D printer with its own unique method of printing."
Cabe, $100 is the cost of the printer or cost per printing item. If it's the cost of a printer, it's very affordable.
@Charles: Yes if you consider the process of a product lifecycle that is a possibility but Im not sure that it will happen soon. Still the technology is new and it will take some good slot of time for it to reach the dying stage
Yes, Chuck, I hate to be skeptical, and the video looks impressive, but I just wouldn't believe this is high-quality until I saw evidence of it myself. But you're right, it's good that inventors are working on the affordability angle for 3D printers and for sure some day one will be in nearly every home just like 2D ones are now.
This reminds me of the genius of Steve Wozniak when he made a floppy disk controller for the Apple II that used only 5 chips while the rest of the industry was using 125.
He realized the Apple II computer wasn't doing anything else, why not use it as part of the controller?
This 3D printer is using the microphone and speaker ports on the computer as the active portion of the controller. This way the printer does not have to be as smart as the other 3D printers on the market. You've already purchased the expensive parts of the printer when you bought you computer that is going to control it.
Of course the problem now will be keeping the computer on task, who hasn't experienced stutter on music playback. That could be killer for your print.
Well, it's not technologically imposible, although that price point is one heck of a hurdle to get over. On the other hand, the huge funding response might make it easier to achieve economies of scale.
The galvo motors are similar to what hard drives use to position their read/write heads. And as odd as it may sound, the sound card is a very good digital-to-analog converter. So in theory, this can work. It's quite a clever set of hacks, relying mostly on proven technologies, albeit being used in very nonconventional ways.
The hard parts will be the tuning. Getting the laser sweep distances to match the desired print dimensions will be tricky; the laser mount will need to be perfectly level *and* at exactly the correct height above the surface of the liquid. And getting a solid measurement of the actual liquid depth will be very finicky, and probably dangerously vulnerable to temperature changes, just to name one variable. To really make this work, some kind of easy and very robust method for setting and checking these calibrations will be absolutely required. Any collimation spread of the laser over distance would also play havoc with print accuracy as the print size increased.
That said, I signed up. For $100, it's a reasonable risk. If nothing else, it should push the state of the art in this part of the 3D-printing space.
What should be the perception of a product’s real-world performance with regard to the published spec sheet? While it is easy to assume that the product will operate according to spec, what variables should be considered, and is that a designer obligation or a customer responsibility? Or both?
Biomimicry has already found its way into the development of robots and new materials, with researchers studying animals and nature to come up with new innovations. Now thanks to researchers in Boston, biomimicry could even inform the future of electrical networks for next-generation displays.
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.