Hasta La Gadget!

As of today the 3D printing revolution is over. Who wants to wait hours for a machine that painstakingly draws a plastic trinket layer-by-layer when the Muffin Monster can create everything from shipping pallets, to shoes, to full-on couches in mere seconds? More »

If you’ve followed the news, a collective of hackers recently rented a 3D printer to build a real, working gun. The group, Defense Distributed, began the project but once the renter, Stratasys, discovered what they were building, they took the printer back.

Writes the Danger Room:

Stratasys responded to questions by saying: “Stratasys reserves the right to reject an order. Members of Defense Distributed, like any U.S. citizens, are able to follow the well-established federal and state regulations to manufacture, distribute or procure a firearm in this country.”

This whole kerfuffle – and that’s really what it is – clouds a very interesting debate that we’re all about to have as 3D printing goes more and more mainstream. While we currently look at home 3D printing as the domain of the hopelessly nerdy, fact is that the 3D printer is past its infancy and is now in the gangly, awkward adolescent stage that all paradigm-shifting technologies face.

3D printing 2012 is where home printing was in 1982. Those old enough to remember tractor-fed paper and even the abysmal thermal printers of yore can relate to this situation. 3D printers, though technologically impressive, just aren’t that exciting to the average consumer. By 1984, however, Broderbund launched Print Shop and made the run-of-the-mill dot matrix printer far more compelling. The resolution was still spotty and people didn’t see printers as a “threat” per se until we were able to essentially print out a letter-quality page a decade or so later. In short, printers snuck up on us, just as 3D printers will.

In terms of a direct analogue to this issue, however, we can point to home taping and CD burning. The expectation – and it’s a valid one – is that home 3D printing will get so good that the items it produces will rival simple items we now buy. Right now a Makerbot takes a few hours to print out the most rudimentary of products, but what happens when those hours dwindle to minutes? What happens when we can print an Ikea silverware set in our kitchens? Again, perhaps we’re a far piece from being able to do those things, but the programmers at Broderbund had no idea that their software would soon be replaced by real home desktop publishing and printing tools that created a polished and very handsome product in a few seconds.

So what of this gun? There are multiple arguments against manufacturing this item and none of them hold water. First, there is legality. A gun “is a weapon that launches one or more projectile(s) at high velocity through confined burning of a propellant.” We could create a Saturday Night Special with a metal tube and a nail or we could make a gun in our basement provided it wasn’t for sale or trade. That these folks were planning on using a leased printer to build it and later release the plans is a perfectly legal action. Sharing the process for building a gun, as the Anarchist’s Cookbook shows us, is protected speech. To think otherwise is to invite chilling effects to the free distribution of information (we can argue the counter-point that if these folks were building an atomic bomb we would have every right to silence them, but atomic bombs are ostensibly illegal). But, ultimately, what they were doing wasn’t illegal.

Then there’s the financial issue. If anyone with time, a little metal, and the will can print a gun, won’t Smith & Wesson go out of business? I find that to be very specious argument on the surface, but it bears further analysis. People are calling 3D printers “piracy machines.” This is arguably heavy handed, but if I can print a perfect replica of, say, a Mickey Mouse bobblehead and share the plans for that bobblehead, then Disney is out a bobblehead sale. However, as we learned from home taping, the interface between the digital and the physical is a difficult barrier to breach. Music and film piracy is rampant because it’s frictionless. The printing of an object, on the other hand, requires a signifiant investment. Unless you’re planning on making a gross of bobbleheads, it’s probably not worth the time and materials to really stick it to Disney. After all, home taping didn’t kill the music industry. Napster did.

Finally there’s the moral issue, which we partially addressed above. There are those who believe guns are our birthright and others who believe they should be outlawed. But what of guns that you don’t have to buy? What about guns that can’t be traced and are potentially dangerous to the shooter and, obviously, the target? Don’t we have a moral responsibility to protect, I suppose, “The Children”?

We do, but this isn’t the way it’s done. I am, to be clear, against guns in my home but I will not begrudge any individual or group the right to experiment with 3D-printed firearms. Innovation in hardware comes from experimentation. Without it, we slog up to dead end after dead end and nothing is learned. While I disagree that a 3D printed gun is an important part of my household, I do agree that it is an important part of our right to tinker. Humans invented weapons before they invented ploughs, that much is sure. But without those weapons, we would not have expanded so far afield and into the era of agriculture.

Stratasys failed here. Their claims of illegality arise from fear of litigation. Had the group said nothing and just printed their parts, the Stratasys would have been none the wiser. Whether it’s a legal, financial, or moral issue, ever hacker has the right to hack and, in turn they are responsible for that they create. As Hall wrote of Voltaire, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Replace “say” with “build” and we have an answer to this seemingly unsolvable conundrum.

We’re not quite in a place where the world is about to collapse in on itself because guns can be printed, but we’re certainly in shooting range. A collective by the name of Defense Distributed, lead by UT-Austin law student Cody Wilson, has made it clear that they want to be the first to create a 3D-printable model of a gun that anyone can make themselves in the comfort of their own home. The problem with this (if you consider this situation to have just one problem) is that the group that’d been leasing a DD their printer didn’t agree with the idea, and have come to Wilson’s home to seize the printer before any illegal printing activities occurred.

Wilson created a promotional video surrounding the creation of the weapon they’re aiming for – a partially 3D printed AR-15 assault rifle being one example they’ve got, shown above. The video notes that “The Defense Distributed goal isn’t really personal armament.” Though arguments have been made against the group in that the final goal of the end-users of the printed objects may not fit in with their original creator’s goals, DD goes on.

“It’s more the liberation of information. It’s about living in a world where you can just download the file for the thing you want to make in this life. As the printing press revolutionized literacy, 3-D printing is in its moment.” – Wilson

The group representing the creators of the 3D printer that Wilson had on-hand up until very recently when Stratasys Inc. sent a note to the man noting that his lease would be cancelled due to their policy to “not knowingly allow its printers to be used for illegal purposes.” Though Wilson argued against their claim that he needed a federal license to manufacture firearms with a point on how he never intended to sell the arms, Stratasys was not suitably impressed, and seized the printer.

Defense Distributed has raised $20,000 online all in a bid to create a design and develop the “world’s first entirely 3D printed gun”. This weapon they call the Wiki Weapon, and it’s on it’s way.

[via Slate]

3D Printable Gun effort cut short by Stratasys is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

3D printing is coming into its own. No longer relegated to the professional sector, anyone who has the cash can essentially join in the fun with a Makerbot or a RepRap.

But FormLabs has found a way to bring the high-end performance of top-notch machines down to the price of a Makerbot. Yesterday, they launched the Form 1, an affordable, professional 3D printer, on Kickstarter with the goal of reaching $100,000 in funding in one month. Today, they’ve received about $660,000 and have over 400 backers. And the number keeps climbing.

I spoke with co-founder Maxim Lobovsky about his sudden success, asking him how the Form 1 differentiates in the space. Essentially, there are two groups of 3D printers, the high-end professional machines and the hobbyist machines. The high-end printers cost anywhere between $10,000 and $1 million, whereas hobbyist machines cost between $2,000 and $3,000, yet don’t have the same high resolution output.

“We see Form 1 as the first 3D printer that takes affordability to the high-end, professional level,” said Lobovsky.

To give you some perspective, Makerbots start at $2,199, and the most basic Form 1 pledge you can make on Kickstarter is $2,299, and includes “the full Form 1 package including the printer, 1L resin, and Form Finish Kit.” Clearly, Formlabs isn’t looking to undercut price, but then again, this isn’t another hobbyist 3D printer. Lobovsky believes his competition lies with the professional machines, and in terms of those costs, the Form 1 is a steal.

There were only 25 spaces for the basic Form 1 package, which sold out almost immediately.

The Form 1 uses Stereolithography to help makers product their designs. It’s considered the “gold standard” in 3D printing, using a high-precision positioning system to direct a laser onto a tray of liquid resin. This achieves “dramatically better resolution,” according to Lobovsky.

But perhaps more important than the technology is the ecosystem around Form 1. The guys at FormLabs have created software that imports .STL models from any 3D CAD package, supporting structures for complex geometry. And after importing, it only takes a few clicks to get the machine fired up and printing.

This allows any designer or engineer, from the professionals at major corporations to the students putzing around in SketchUp, to enjoy the same high-performance as big companies.

“Bringing the cost of these expensive machines down isn’t enough,” said Lobovsky. “These machines are usually operated by someone entirely dedicated to the job. We knew if we wanted to make the Form 1 available to every maker, every designer, we had to make every part of it accessible. So we streamlined the process.”

According to Lobovsky, there’s no magic formula or secret sauce to Kickstarter success, though he did say they spent extra time and effort on the video and imagery within the post, as well as honing their message. We’ve seen a few stories like this, namely that of the Pebble smartwatch, yet all of the shining stars of Kickstarter are very different. Rather, it’s the demand for this product that has led to such success.

FormLabs claims there are around 30,000 professional 3D printers installed around the world. However, approximately 10 million people actively use 3D CAD software. FormLabs simply aims to fill in the gap.

The most amazing part of this already-amazing story is the way that FormLabs was able to bring down the cost of the machine. Lobovsky says it was thanks in large part to three different factors.

The first is that the team used a new kind of laser, specifically a 405nm Bluray laser diode. In the past, the lasers used to run these professional 3D printers have cost more than the machine itself. With this new type of laser that only recently came on the market, FormLabs was able to keep manufacturing (and thus market costs) down.

The second factor was the expiration of a few patents, meaning that the team didn’t need to pay high licensing fees to get this product to market.

Finally, and most importantly, FormLabs was able to look at all those high-end, $10k+ machines, and essentially decide what was necessary.

“Most high-end machines are built for companies with specific needs and don’t want to compromise on performance in certain areas,” said Lobovsky. “We looked for the base feature set that is useful for a lot of people.”

It took FormLabs just under three hours to reach their goal, and with the way this number keeps climbing, I wouldn’t be surprised if they surpassed Pebble’s $10.27 million in funding by the end of the month.

Dror Berman, Founding Managing Director of Innovation Endeavors, expressed enthusiasm at the early-stage success of the Form 1 in an email.

“It’s great to see Formlabs moving forward so quickly. By making high quality 3D printers affordable, Formlabs is essentially changing the economics of creating and breaks down the doors for inventors and entrepreneurs of all kinds. We want to be a part of this revolution.”

Click to view slideshow.

If you follow this site regularly, you know I’m a big believer in 3D printing as one of the major technological movements of the 21st century. We’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg with this budding technology these days, but in 10 years, I bet that 3D printed products and parts will be as ordinary as stuff coming off of assembly lines. As printers get more accurate, faster, come down in price, and can handle new materials, adoption will grow, and soon enough we’ll be printing parts for our cars, houses and bodies using these incredible technological marvels. So when I saw that there’s now a 3D printing material that lets you output wood parts, I was even more excited.

This material, called LAYWOO-D3 is made from 40% recycled wood, along with binding polymers to hold it together. It’s loaded into a 3D printer as a thin filament, and when printing is complete, it forms a wooden surface not dissimilar from pressboard.

You can even cut it with a saw, grind it or paint it – though it’s not clear how smooth you could make it with sanding. Depending on the temperature you print it at, the color of the wood can vary as well.

While it’s not exactly the finest quality wood, it’s still really cool that you can print wooden components. At this point, the material appears to be designed for the RepRap 3D printer, though it’s not out of the question that it could be used with other devices like the MakerBot Replicator 2. If you’re interested in checking it out, you can purchase it in small quantities from eBay or direct from German RepRap.

[via 3ders via Ponoko]