Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Fab@Home

One thing mentioned in the New Scientist article that should get everyone's
attention is the parallel drawn to how the home PC drove an entire
revolution in computing, moving things out of million-dollar mainframes into
small business and the home.

There's an even more important parallel is what was made possible with a
free software compiler gcc, which was largely one man's effort. It made the
entire open-source effort possible, stripping compiler writers of revenue
from library license fees, driving software development tools into the hands
of anyone that wanted them. And so we ended up with Linux.

While there's plenty of disparaging noise made about Linux, it is a major
thorn in Microsoft's (all of them, really) side, literally forcing them into
accelerated development and R&D just to stay ahead of what can be had for
free. It also kept them from dominating the Internet server market. So
everyone benefits from the pioneers' efforts even if they don't use the free
product.

So be proud of your efforts to wring all the profits out of the
manufacturing and toolmaking industry by giving it away for free -- it makes
the breed better.

All we need now is someone who can do for mechanical (and electrical) design
tools what Stallman did for software design tools.

On 1/10/07, Sebastien Bailard <penguin@...> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 10 January 2007 11:32, Phil Mattison wrote:
> > > A laser cut perspex CNC router with a syringe. It seems silicon
> > > sealer might have been the nearest to an engineering material it has
> > > laid down. Not getting overly excited here but I do like efforts
> > > towards low cost rapid prototyping.
> > >
> > > Graham
> >
> > This raises the same question I have about the RepRap project. While it
> > looks interesting and maybe can duplicate itself, I have to wonder at
> the
> > utility of being able to make a wide variety of shapes from one or two
> > types of thermoplastic. Even the really expensive 3D prototype machines
> > have a very limited range of applications, which is part of the reason
> they
> > are so expensive. Seems to me none of these machines can make anything
> > useful for more than a conceptual model without at least some
> subtractive
> > post-machining. The example shown of the first RepRap component made for
> > itself looks like it could have been made easier from a chunk of plastic
> > with a drill press and a scroll saw. If all I want is a conceptual model
> > I'll content myself with a 3D virtual model and keep my $20K, or however
> > much it is.
> >
> You're correct that he could have done it more easily with a drill press
> and a
> scroll saw. But he made a shot glass a few days ago:
> http://reprap.blogspot.com/2007/01/cheers.html
> You can't say that that's not useful.
>
> More seriously, if you can make plastic gears and other widgets, you can
> make
> an inkjet printer with a RepRap and some off the shelf parts. Or a robot,
> or
> maybe a sewing machine. Or prostheses:
> http://openprosthetics.org/
>
> The really expensive 3D prototype machines are making parts out of steel,
> plastic, ceramic, or rubber, using a laser to sinter (fuse) various
> powders.
> We're not at that stage yet. We're looking at depositing ceramic and
> metal
> powder green bodies and fusing them in furnaces, as well as doing lost-wax
> casting with wax or thermoplastic. (Note that "We're looking at" !=
> "We've
> accomplished", but I'm confident, especially about the lost-wax casting.)
>
> It's a fabrication machine with a build cost of < USD$500, simple enough
> that
> a child could use one. It's not going to be perfect, but it should be
> useful.
>
> > It reminds me of a conversation with some friends at dinner once. He
> owns a
> > Bridgeport mill for hobby use and was telling his wife that a milling
> > machine is the only machine that can duplicate itself. She looked
> dubious,
> > so I added, "That's why every guy needs one, just in case he evern needs
> > another one."
> > --
> > Phil Mattison
>
> I shall have to try that on my wife.
>
> Regards,
> -Sebastien
>
>
> Addresses:
> FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
> Post Messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@yahoogroups.com, wanliker@...,
> timg@...
> Moderator: pentam@... indigo_red@... davemucha@...
> [Moderators]
> URL to this group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>
> OFF Topic POSTS: General Machining
> If you wish to post on unlimited OT subjects goto:
> aol://5863:126/rec.crafts.metalworking or go thru Google.com to reach it
> if you have trouble.
> http://www.metalworking.com/news_servers.html
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jobshophomeshop I consider this to be a
> sister site to the CCED group, as many of the same members are there, for OT
> subjects, that are not allowed on the CCED list.
>
> NOTICE: ALL POSTINGS TO THIS GROUP BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN BY POSTING
> THEM. DON'T POST IF YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT THIS.....NO EXCEPTIONS........
> bill
> List Mom
> List Owner
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]