a debate on 3d printing future
I wanted to write this post for quite some time now. A very interesting debate has been taking place on the question if 3d printers will become mainstream – meaning if they will become as ubiquitous as 2d printers are now. It has all started from a post on Replicator blog. Later SolidSmack and Fabbaloo has joined the discussion. You might also want to check out post at: Ponoko blog and Fluid Forms’ Twitter which refer to this thought’s exchange.
I rather think that the mixture of digital fabrication, mass customization and generative design will have a capacity to surprise many. 3d printing itself is becoming more and more available. Shapeways for example recently allowed you to colour your 3d printed objects.
Another argument pro mainstream 3d printing is that if combined with adequate optimization tools it could provide products which are really efficient. Efficiency is not usually associated with 3d printing due to it’s cost, but take a look at Sean Hanna’s and Siavash H. Mahdavi’s work on optimizing a SLS microstructure which I wrote about in my previous post. By the way I think that an application of an optimization algorithm similar to the one used in case of SLS microstructure to Enrico Dini’s large scale 3d printing technology could yeild some fascinating results.
Filed under: digital fabrication, digital paradigm, printing in 3d | Leave a Comment
Tags: 3d printing debate, Enrico Dini, Michal Piasecki, Sean Hanna
No Responses Yet to “a debate on 3d printing future”