3D Printing - An Explosion of Innovation on the Horizon?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Breotan**

So, it seems that patents (unlike copyright) have a very limited shelf life. The moment they expire, anyone and everyone can jump into the market and try to make their 3D printer. The ones that do it well and print with a finer resolution will be the ones that "change the game" so to speak. The others will be the "dot matrix" printers of our age.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ready-3d-printing-explode-next-182837485.html

The Atlantic wrote:Get Ready: 3D Printing Will Explode Next Year, When Key Patents Expire

Current 3D printers are cheap, but compared to where we're going, they're as Pong is to the iPhone. (AP)

Here's what's holding back 3D printing, the technology that's supposed to revolutionize manufacturing and countless other industries: patents. In February 2014, key patents that currently prevent competition in the market for the most advanced and functional 3D printers will expire, says Duann Scott, design evangelist at 3D-printing company Shapeways.

These patents cover a technology known as "laser sintering," the lowest-cost 3D-printing technology. Because of its high resolution in all three dimensions, laser sintering can produce goods that can be sold as finished products.

Whenever someone talks about 3D printing revolutionizing manufacturing, they're talking about the kinds of goods produced by, for example, the industrial-grade 3D printing machines used by Shapeways. The company used by countless industrial designers, artists and entrepreneurs who can't afford their own 3D laser sintering printers, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars each.

A huge drop in price and a flood of Chinese 3D printers

Older models of 3D printers are already pouring out of China. (Xinhua)

Once the key patents on 3D printing via laser sintering expire, we could see huge drop in the price of these devices, says Scott. This isn't just idle speculation; when the key patents expired on a more primitive form of 3D printing, known as fused deposition modeling, the result was an explosion of open-source FDM printers that eventually led to iconic home and hobbyist 3D printer manufacturer Makerbot. And Makerbot was recently acquired by 3D-printing giant Stratasys for about $400 million in stock, plus a potential $200 million stock bonus. That acquisition was a homecoming of sorts for Makerbot; Stratasys was founded by Charles Hull, who invented 3D printing via FDM, the very technology on which Makerbot was based.

Within just a few years of the patents on FDM expiring, the price of the cheapest FDM printers fell from many thousands of dollars to as little as $300. This led to a massive democratization of hobbyist-level 3D printers and injected a huge amount of excitement into the nascent movement of "Makers," who manufacture at home on the scale of one object at a time.

A similar sequence involving the lifting of intellectual property barriers, a rise in competition, and a huge drop in price is likely to play out again in laser deposition 3D printers, says Shapeways' Scott. "This is what happened with FDM," he says. "As soon as the patents expired, everything exploded and went open-source, and now there are hundreds of FDM machines on the market. An FDM machine was $14,000 five years ago and now it's $300."

Many of those inexpensive 3D printers are being manufactured in--where else?--China. In addition to a thriving home-grown industry in 3D printers, in 2012 China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology launched an initiative to fund 10 research centers devoted to 3D printing, at a cost of 200 million yuan ($32 million).

Disruptive implications for industry and the democratization of distributed manufacturing

Copies of famous works of art are just the beginning. (AP/Cosmo Wenman)

One thing a lot of observers don't understand about 3D printing is that not all 3D printing technologies are created equal. The revolution in manufacturing that was supposed to come with cheap, desktop 3D printers hasn't materialized because, frankly, the models they produce are basically novelties, handy for giving you a feel for what something will look like in three dimensions, but not really usable for creating prototypes that can be directly translated into molds for mass production, and certainly not usable for creating finished goods.

With the expiration of patents on laser sintering 3D printing, however, all of that is about to change. Currently, designers who want to go from idea to finished product in a matter of hours, and create finished products to sell to the public--like these accessories for Google Glass--have to order 3D prints from a company like Shapeways. The problem is, Shapeways' services are in such demand that it takes two weeks to get a finished product from the company, which is hardly the future of instant manufacturing that 3D printing was supposed to enable.

One of Shapeways' problems is that the company can't buy enough advanced 3D printers (the laser-sintering kind) to keep up with demand. This is because 3D Systems, the company that makes the models that Shapeways uses, has a 12- to 18-month waitlist for its printers. Cheap laser-sintering 3D printers of the sort made by Formlabs, which sells a desktop laser-sintering 3D printer for $3,300, could finally give people the ability to manufacture (plastic) parts of the same quality as those mass-produced through traditional means, such as injection molding. (Formlabs got around the patent issue by first getting sued by and then licensing the IP of 3D Systems, which controls the key patents that are set to expire.)

Or, if you believe Duann Scott, people will continue to use services like those of his company so that they can get even higher quality 3D prints, and in larger quantities--and, potentially, much faster than the current turnaround time of two weeks. All of this means that the release of these patents could be an important step in getting us to the future of mass customization and distributed manufacturing that we were promised.

Best user comment: "Can 3D printers print more 3D printers?"

**AlexHolker**

Breotan wrote:
Best user comment: "Can 3D printers print more 3D printers?"

There's at least one project being worked on with this in mind: with each generation of the printer using more parts printed by the previous one.

**Buzzsaw**

I do think that there is a possible explosion around the corner, but what seems to be constantly overlooked in these discussions is what is in real short supply: the talent and application needed to actually produce the original sculpts in the first place.

Having a printer capable of turning out sculpts of the highest quality won't let me produce highest quality work, simply because I don't have the chops that talented artists like Jon Troy Nickel or Andrew Rae or Mark Mondragon have.

What we may see, however, are people like the aforementioned artists entering the marketplace in new and intriguing ways: imagine being able to buy the raw digital file from an artist, to then pose and customize and finally print out for your own use.

You like a particular character, but you don't like the pose? You want to build a completely personalized miniature for your D&D campaign? All possible. But it all starts with talent.

**BryllCream**

I would have thought that even changing the pose of an existing design is outside of the average user's scope, unless there were pre-made options.

Even so this will never actually "revolutionise" the bread and butter of wargaming. Unless these machines can print an entire squad of soldiers at a reasonable time period and for a lower price than they're currently available - and in a material that can withstand actually being used on a battlefield, *and* can be painted. Oh and it still has to be of a much higher quality than anything that's currently around.

Personally I expect in 10 years time we'll still be on the cusp of a 3d revolution, but i'm a cynic.

**-Loki-**

BryllCream wrote:
I would have thought that even changing the pose of an existing design is outside of the average user's scope, unless there were pre-made options.

It is. People who say 'I can just download a 3D file, move the arms and legs, and have a completely new position' aren't familiar with 3D models. This can be done, but the 3D model will need a skeleton and a lot of work getting it ready for that kind of movement. It won't be what most people end up putting out for download, which will definitely be very WYSIWIG.

**frozenwastes**

If it becomes popular enough, i think people will start designing for reposing in mind. So you'll be able to download the 3d file and print the selections you want to make the pose you want. More design work/cost, but I think if the demand ends up being there, it'll happen.

**Tannhauser42**

I'd be more interested in a machine that paints the minis I already have.
And while the 3D printers may come down in price, how much do the raw materials cost? How many toy soldiers do you need to print out to make your money back?

**Andrew1975**

I do think that there is a possible explosion around the corner, but what seems to be constantly overlooked in these discussions is what is in real short supply: the talent and application needed to actually produce the original sculpts in the first place.

Right, I like most people have a regular printer. It does not shoot out Shakespeare on its own. Its just a tool. I also don't think most people would print up Shakespeare by looking it up on line and printing.

Printers are cheap, good ink is super expensive (well not to manufacture, but to buy). I imagine it will eventually be the same with 3d printers. Good quality plastic/resin designed for the printers will be expensive as it will come in proprietary containers that only work with specific models. I can't even imagine what a cartridge of HP resin will cost. They price gouge worse than GW!

**silent25**

Ah another 3D Printer thread. Though Buzzsaw brought up the best point regarding the flaw in this supposed bonanza. Interesting though, wired.com put out an article in February saying the exact opposite, don't expect easy 3D printing anytime soon.

http://www.wired.com/design/2013/02/3-d-printing-patents/

**Skinnereal**

Breotan wrote:
Best user comment: "Can 3D printers print more 3D printers?"

Yes, but to a limit.
I'm getting the bits to build a Mendel from reprap.org:
"RepRap is humanity's first general-purpose self-replicating manufacturing machine."

Until the resolution an extruder gets better, only laser-type printers will be able to make anything near GW-grade models.
I'll be using mine to make buildings and terrain, and possibly artillery and vehicles.

Maplin are now selling 3D printers, and the plastic spools cost around £24 per Kg.

**chaos0xomega**

Buzzsaw wrote:
I do think that there is a possible explosion around the corner, but what seems to be constantly overlooked in these discussions is what is in real short supply: the talent and application needed to actually produce the original sculpts in the first place.

Having a printer capable of turning out sculpts of the highest quality won't let me produce highest quality work, simply because I don't have the chops that talented artists like Jon Troy Nickel or Andrew Rae or Mark Mondragon have.

What we may see, however, are people like the aforementioned artists entering the marketplace in new and intriguing ways: imagine being able to buy the raw digital file from an artist, to then pose and customize and finally print out for your own use.

You like a particular character, but you don't like the pose? You want to build a completely personalized miniature for your D&D campaign? All possible. But it all starts with talent.

Well, then the modeling software industry really needs to catch up, because posing models is (in my opinion) more difficult than sculpting them to begin with (well... rigging them so they can be posed at least). The people that are skilled in doing that sort of thing probably won't be releasing those models to the public, because that is a REALLY valuable skill to have in the modeling world, and they can make a lot more money controlling the files/product than the "open source revolution" everyone seems to be hoping for.

I've said it before, i'll say it again, the real "revolution" will be that 3d printing will make traditional manufacturing techniques more viable for the masses. Those 6-figure cost, complex, hyper-expensive 4-part slide core injection molds that you need to mass produce geometrically complex plastic (or other) components in huge volumes really quickly for pennies? Well, the cost and time to manufacture the parts themselves won't go down, but considering how fast and how cheap it is already thats okay (seriously, that $100 Baneblade kit? They crank one out every couple seconds (if that long), and the cost of the material used is only about a couple dollars at most (if that much), and if they are using larger machines the costs and time goes down since they can have multiple cavities per mold), but the cost to purchase the molds? Reduced to a fraction, 1/10 the current costs or less.

**RiTides**

Am I misunderstanding things, because he continues to talk about laser sintering and Shapeways, which makes sense, but then he throws Formlabs in there.

I've always referred to technology like what Formlabs is using as "SLA" or "stereo-lithography". I've always referred to printers like what Shapeways uses for their cheaper materials as "SLS" or "selective laser sintering".

The first generally uses a vat of liquid resin, which a laser hardens, while the second generally uses sand-like materials (of many types) also sintered with a laser.

So, basically, the term "laser sintering" can be applied to both of these methods, and the relevant patent applies to both and is expiring soon? I had not made that connection, and it is very interesting if correct (if someone who also knows about these things could comment on if I'm understanding it correctly, that'd be great).

**Breotan**

I expect that one or two will try to make little toy copyright infringements which won't be very good but others will come and improve them or make their own to prove their skill. Soon, like game mods, many patterns will be circulating the torrents and popping out of printers with greater frequency.

**Capt. Camping**

Right now these cheap printers have good quality for vehicles, buildings and some weapon bitz. When printing quality and speed improves, we are going to see more printed stuff.

**FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs**

BryllCream wrote:
I would have thought that even changing the pose of an existing design is outside of the average user's scope, unless there were pre-made options.

Even so this will never actually "revolutionise" the bread and butter of wargaming. Unless these machines can print an entire squad of soldiers at a reasonable time period and for a lower price than they're currently available - and in a material that can withstand actually being used on a battlefield, *and* can be painted. Oh and it still has to be of a much higher quality than anything that's currently around.

Personally I expect in 10 years time we'll still be on the cusp of a 3d revolution, but i'm a cynic.

You could always create a single posable figure and make a limited mold of it- I think smooth it would be a good resource. That would reduce cost, but increase time- but hey, you could use the quick drying stuff. The only problem you might get is bubbles, and thats the same as buying finecast(maybe a bit more in dunwxAT(Mold alignment issues))

How much right now is it going to cost to make buildings for 15 mm off of shapeways?

**Kilkrazy**

Cheap printer =/= cheap printing in quantity due to the various factors mentioned by several people above.

Let's say you want to be able to print figures that individually cost under 50 cents, Right now you can buy multi-pose plastic 28mm figures like the Perry Brothers kits, for 50 c or under.

If you buy a printer for $400, $100 of raw material, and $100 for 3D models, you need to print 1,200 figures to get the price right. That is several large armies for most games. It could work as a club project but I don't think most individuals would be interested. It's easier and quicker just to buy kits.

**PsychoticStorm**

I personally feel it will see more use from people who want to make their own stuff, or who want things that are unavailable.

If for example a group here wanted to make a "mechanicus" army, they could theoretically all join together hire a good 3D sculptor to make them some suitable non infighting models and then print them at their own 3D printers, likewise peopel wanting to make their own wargame, as a side project, or a hobby project, but do not want to commit to the true cost of manufacturing could use it to make either a limited range for themselves or sell them as digital to be printed files.

I personally feel it will have the same effect the PDF/ebook had previously on rule systems, making it more affordable to "toy" with and lowering the entry cost for people interested in having a go.

**marv335**

To be honest, I see 3D printing as more of an aid to prototyping than manufacture.
It's ideal for small runs of models, but I wouldn't do high volume.

I don't think 3D printing will hurt the model industry in the same way that printers didn't kill publishing.

**Jehan-reznor**

marv335 wrote:
To be honest, I see 3D printing as more of an aid to prototyping than manufacture.
It's ideal for small runs of models, but I wouldn't do high volume.

I don't think 3D printing will hurt the model industry in the same way that printers didn't kill publishing.

It will if 3D printing, becomes cheap, the resolution becomes high enough, and if 3D files are easily downloadable to the home user.

**Orock**

Heres the thing though, you dont NEED to download a 3d model and "change the arms" what this will allow you to do is have bunches of people put their own custom models they made, much like today, up on the net, then you can print THEIR custom changed model. I bet in the future it will be popular enough you could custom your entire army if you wanted this way. Imagine downloading the best modded model from everyones works available online.

**Sigvatr**

I know this will happen some day, maybe sooner, maybe later, and I will happily increase my GW army's size with reprints - even with lower quality, I'll just put those remade NG in the lower ranks.

Individual poses are a huge thing and I'd love having such an option. Someone else already said that'd be a lot of work and that it needed some knowledge on 3d modeling, but people who are really interested in individual poses will most likely dive right into it. Furthermore, this might open up the "individual modeling" market which will further enrich the miniature market as a whole.

I'm looking forward to it.

**FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs**

You wouldn't even have to make the file posable as I said- just have ball sockets on seperate pieces.

Anyone know how much it would cost to build a, lets say, 2 story, 4 medium stands (1.25" by .75") a story house in 15 mm?

**cammy**

3d printing will not kill the industry, prices will not be able to complete with mass produced methods - i work in the printing indusrty and scale is huge.

3d printing will make it cheaper to make the moulds needed cheaper, so will allow more players into the game, but the average joe with a 3d printer even if they could produce decent quality minis will not be able to get any where near the cost of a mass produced item unless they churn our a lot of models ( which i doubt a cartridge will do)

**Skinnereal**

cammy wrote:

3d printing will make it cheaper to make the moulds needed cheaper

That's a good point. Why print models, when you can print a mould instead.
Greenstuff the details, add them to the mould, and there's the quality you wanted that 3D printing cannot achieve.

As for the mass production point, a lot of 3D printers are marketed as rapid prototypers. They are not designed to make a lot of the same item.

**-Loki-**

3d printing blanks and reverse sculpting details sounds so much harder and more expensive from sheer labour of trial and error than simply tooling a mold the normal way.

**fishy bob**

I sense doom.

**Necros**

How long till Doomsday Preppers start to prep for the inevitable 3D printers 3D printing robot minions bent on the annihilation of all humans?

**marv335**

The way I would do it is to use the 3D printer to make one unit, say, for example a sprue of meltaguns, then use a traditional silicone mould with resin/metal.
I just don't see them as a high yeild production source.

**Wolfstan**

If there is a suitable demand for it then there will be suppliers. The price and quality are always changing. Every 3 or 4 months there is yet another report on the advances of the tech or the price dropping. If there is money to be made from it you can bet that somebody will feed the market.

On demand scenery will be the first break through. Being able to print off the pieces needed for a RPG scenery or a skirmish mission is very close already. Figures will come after that. Neither condemning or condoning, 3d model figures will appear on torrent sites. Comments made about having the skill to made 3d models are totally pointless, they will be out there, supplied by 3rd parties. How much of an impact this will have on the industry, I don't know, it will depend on how much the printing materials will cost.

Don't forget that once the technology is proven, the next step will be to develop different types of printing material. Who says that a cheap printing material won't be found? Something that wouldn't be suitable or practical for traditional model making could be ideal for 3d printing.

Oh, and how long before somebody finds away to make use of recyclable plastics as a print material?

**newbis**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Cheap printer =/= cheap printing in quantity due to the various factors mentioned by several people above.

Let's say you want to be able to print figures that individually cost under 50 cents, Right now you can buy multi-pose plastic 28mm figures like the Perry Brothers kits, for 50 c or under.

If you buy a printer for $400, $100 of raw material, and $100 for 3D models, you need to print 1,200 figures to get the price right. That is several large armies for most games. It could work as a club project but I don't think most individuals would be interested. It's easier and quicker just to buy kits.

This is short sighted. If you buy a 3D printer it isn't going to be just for minis. Plenty of other uses for one around the house. Further, you are overlooking service bureaus. No need to buy a 3D printer yourself when you can order what you want.

As far as material costs go, you can already buy extruders that recycle plastic for use in 3D printers. It will also be much more difficult to overcharge for materials. Think about the oil or brake fluid for your car. The auto maker or your dealer might say you can only use their fluids, but most consumers realize that's nonsense. Resin is resin. A plastic spool is a plastic spool. Manufacturers that attempt to make one-use only cartridges will fail when people 3D print out cartridges that can be refilled and reused.

Modeling is less of an issue than people are making it out to be. If you ever played Spore, you've seen how simple posing a 3D model can be. All that is required is a similar program used by the majority of community modelers to resolve the problem. And if you think people won't put up designs for free, I suggest you head to Thingiverse and take a look around. Add to that cheap 3D scanners (you can use your iPhone or a Kinect), and you start to see the potential of 3D printing for home manufacturing.

As far as volume printing goes, GE Aviation would like to have a word with you about feasibility. They intend to 3D print 25,000 engine parts as a test run. If that isn't volume, I'm not sure what qualifies.