Wohlers Talk

The U.S. has dropped to tenth place worldwide in high school completion, according to the September 2007 issue of Manufacturing Engineering. In 2004, the average annual income for a high school drop out was about $16,500, compared to more than $26,000 for a graduate.

What can be done to reduce the problem? One idea is to offer more opportunities for hands-on activities that engage students. Some kids do not take well to textbooks and lectures. A number of these same students excel with the right conditions. In the May 22 issue of Machine Design, editor Leland Teschler explained that a kid with a 1.9 GPA became a 4.0 student when he began to apply concepts in hands-on courses.

Teschler went on to discuss Project Lead the Way (PLTW), a program that introduces middle and high school students to applied engineering concepts. One PLTW instructor explained that kids have fun because they don’t know they are learning physics, Teschler said. The hands-on, project and problem-based approach adds rigor to technical programs and relevance to traditional academics, the PLTW website states. The Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME) Education Foundation has partnered with PLTW.

PLTW educators are typically former industrial arts/education instructors and many of them now teach CAD. Some of them are beginning to bring additive fabrication (AF) and 3D printing into their courses, which is a perfect fit. The kids develop skills in conceptual design, modeling, and experimentation and then “print” their work in 3D, giving them a chance to touch, evaluate, and test their designs.

I hope that schools throughout the U.S. adopt AF. It will allow kids that are academically challenged a chance to shine in an area that has a bright future. If it does not lead to an engineering degree, that’s okay. Rewarding careers in AF do not require a four-year engineering degree. Examples are operating AF equipment or finishing parts, selling or servicing AF machines, CAD software, or laser scanning systems, or serving as a sales agent for a service provider. What’s more, these are financially and professionally gratifying positions that are important to the future of the U.S.

Many years ago, at least one person predicted the use of additive fabrication (AF) to “3D print” household items. If the bread toaster breaks, a new one—or part of one—would be created on the home 3D printer. The convenience and speed would make it compelling.

I disagreed then and I do now. If the toaster breaks, a new one is purchased for $15–20. Even if a person or family owns or has access to a 3D printer, the system would probably not accommodate the type of material needed for the replacement part(s). Also, 3D model data, needed to drive the system, would need to be created or downloaded. This would not be impossible, but few consumers would want to mess with it.

I do believe that home manufacturing will develop in the future and feel more strongly about it now than ever. People that manufacture at home, however, will serve as “providers” that sell to others, primarily on the web. Individuals will see it as a low-risk, low-overhead business opportunity to manufacture from their basement, spare room, garage, or dorm room. They will discover a niche market and serve this market from their home. A few are already doing it.

Case in point: Fabjectory is a one-person company that has been producing models from Second Life, Google SketchUp, and Nintendo Mii for some time. The price for a color model from Fabjectory is typically $50–200. The home-based operation has been written up in The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The New York Times, Wired, and other major publications. I am also aware of others here in the U.S. and abroad that are offering part-making services from the comfort of their homes.

The market opportunities are vast. Among them are the production of individualized video game characters, sculptures, corporate gifts, figurines, ornaments, lighting designs, custom furniture, wall hangings, and other home and personal accessories. Add it up and you’re looking at markets that total billions of dollars.

So, don’t be surprised when you begin to see small, specialized manufacturers popping up everywhere. At first, it may appear as though they are operating from a regular business or store front. Upon closer examination, you will find that they are small operations located in homes. And, they will be the manufacturer of the future.

Some of you may recognize his name. Cohen helped pioneer the additive fabrication (AF) industry. At 3D Systems, he was instrumental in the development of the SLA 250, once the most popular AF system in the world. Cohen subsequently co-founded Soligen, a Southern California company that used inkjet printing (3DP) technology from MIT to produce ceramic shells for metal castings. He served as vice president of R&D for years at Soligen.

Cohen is also remembered for launching the Rapid Prototyping Report newsletter, the first publication dedicated to AF technology. Cohen sold the newsletter to CAD/CAM Publishing, who published it for many years.

Cohen worked at the University of Southern California for four years where he invented and led the development of a microfabrication technology called EFAB. (EFAB originally stood for Electrochemical FABrication.) The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) supported Cohen’s work at USC. The effort led to the 1999 spinout of Microfabrica where Cohen currently serves as executive vice president of technology and chief technology officer.

EFAB produces micrometer- and millimeter-scale metal parts, subsystems, and devices with features measured in microns. It deposits two distinct metals—currently a nickel-cobalt alloy and copper—layer by layer onto ceramic wafers. The copper is used as sacrificial support material that is ultimately etched away. Microfabrica has produced fully assembled, functional mechanisms, such as devices with dozens of moving parts that are held together with tiny pin joints.

For 21 years, Cohen has been active in the AF industry and a significant contributor to its development. He and his company are expected to remain busy for some time to come. Microfabrica, Boston University, and Harvard Medical School/Children’s Hospital recently won a $5 million grant from the National Institutes of Health for the development of miniaturized tools for minimally invasive heart surgery.

Last week I visited EOS GmbH (Krailling, Germany), a company that manufactures laser-sintering machines for plastics, metals, and foundry sand. By the end of my visit, it became clear to me that EOS is rewriting the rules for metal part fabrication. Conventional methods will not disappear, but a range of metal parts that would otherwise be machined or cast is now being produced using metal laser sintering. The company faces challenges, but it has made a lot of progress in the past few years.

The production of dental restorations using laser sintering is a good example of what is now possible. Dental crowns and bridges are traditionally produced as a custom product for individual patients. The process involves many steps, including the casting of a coping, which serves as the basis for the crown or bridge. Much of the expense is tied to skilled labor that occurs at the dental lab, so streamlining the process can dramatically impact time and cost.

EOS employs an experienced dental lab technician that has helped the company develop a start-to-finish process using its cobalt-chrome material for the copings. Using laser scanning and software products from 3Shape (Copenhagen, Denmark), the process guides the lab technician through the steps of preparing the copings for production on the EOSINT M 270 (metal laser sintering) machine. The data preparation is fast, thanks to the DentalDesigner software from 3Shape. And, the metal copings—380 of them—can be manufactured in 20 hours with little human intervention.

Many dental labs are small “mom ‘n pop” shops with a lot of experience and know-how, but are slow to change. Even so, some labs can see the potential of using laser scanning, good software, and additive fabrication as a competitive weapon. As they adopt the technology, the less progressive companies will have little choice but to also accept it if they want to remain competitive. As they do, the rules of making dental crowns and bridges will change forever.

The results of a recent MoldMaking Technology magazine survey (January 2008) show “foreign competition” as the #1 challenge for the moldmaking industry. (Most readers of the magazine are from the U.S.) To many, this is not surprising, given what has been published on the subject over the past few years. Moldmakers, like many in the product development and manufacturing business, are afraid that the “bleeding” will continue.

What can be done to preserve and even grow manufacturing in the U.S.? One idea is to concentrate on the strengths of our nation and one of them is innovation. People in the U.S. have a wealth of ideas for new products. However, the risk of introducing a new product, or convincing investors to support it, can be daunting. Launching a new product can cost a staggering amount, so companies are usually very cautious when conceiving and rolling out something new.

New methods of manufacturing, such as additive fabrication (AF), provide the opportunity to introduce a new product—or parts that go into one—at a surprisingly low cost. AF does not require any tooling, so this removes one of the biggest costs, both in time and money. This does not help moldmakers, but it sure presents some interesting possibilities for those in the product development business. An example is Janne Kyttanen of Freedom of Creation. He and his company are able to design some consumer products in a day or two and begin to manufacture them by plastic laser sintering the following day.

With innovation as a strength, I predict that many designers, engineers, students, and others will use modern software tools to create products that before were too difficult, expensive, and risky to manufacture. They will create small quantities to test the market to determine whether a demand exists for what they’ve developed. And, they can make changes and improvements along the way without much additional cost. As the custom manufacturing megatrend comes into full swing, those embracing AF for part production will be poised to ride this potentially large and lucrative wave.

Saddleback College (Mission Viejo, California) is the home of the National Center for Rapid Technologies (RapidTech), a four-year program funded by the National Science Foundation. NSF approved the Center in September 2007. RapidTech will assist industry and education with rapid technologies for prototyping, tooling, manufacturing, and reverse engineering. A major emphasis of RapidTech is the preparation of technicians for the world of work.

Many excellent colleges are active in rapid technologies across the country, so why did NSF select Saddleback for the Center? Saddleback’s Advanced Technology Center is at the forefront of offering hands-on experiences in additive fabrication (AF) technologies. The Center currently operates large-format stereolithography from Sony, two 3D printers from Z Corp., a Dimension machine from Stratasys, two 3D printers from 3D Systems, a laser cutting system, a CNC router, a vacuum forming machine, three laser scanners, and several CAD systems. What’s more, Saddleback is planning to acquire additional equipment.

For several years, Saddleback has offered weeklong National Teacher Training Workshops for colleges across the U.S. Over the past few years, 50-60 instructors and administrators have attended each year. This important activity has led to the adoption of AF technology by more than 80 institutions of higher education into their instructional programs.

Saddleback College also works extensively with private industry. It processes 2–3 industrial projects per week (an estimated 120 annually), which provide financial support to the institution. The projects involve new product development and prototyping across many industries, including consumer products, aerospace, motor vehicles, medical, architecture, and entertainment. After introducing new methods and technologies to companies, Saddleback refers them to those who offer commercial services, thus reducing the likelihood of competing with service providers.

Indeed, Saddleback is a community college that stands out. Having attended the first RapidTech Industry Advisory Board meeting last month and last week’s NSF National Visiting Committee meeting, both at Saddleback College, I can say without reservation that the Center is on track. I found that these two volunteer groups from industry and education have offered RapidTech nothing but support and excitement. Stay tuned because I expect that you’ll be hearing more about Saddleback College and RapidTech in the future.

Meghan Connolly, editor of Time-Compression Technologies magazine, recently asked, “What has been the biggest gain, improvement, or advancement over the past year for RP/RM?” The following was my response.

Many interesting advances have occurred. However, the one that stands out the most is the increased popularity of additive fabrication (AF) technology at schools. Almost weekly, I come across an article, news piece, or blog on how a school is putting the technology to work. And, it’s not only colleges and universities. High schools are finding ways to purchase systems and this is exciting to see. Just recently, I visited a high school here in Fort Collins, Colorado and the CAD instructor said he is considering the purchase of an AF system.

This educational activity is critically important to the future of the industry because graduates are entering the workforce with knowledge of what these systems have to offer. These graduates are our future customers, employees, and decision makers. Although it’s difficult to quantify, the multiplier effect from education is undoubtedly increasing awareness of AF for modeling, prototyping, and pattern-making applications. I hope that instructors and lab managers are also introducing students to the use of AF technology for custom and replacement part manufacturing, short-run production, and series production. A growing number of corporate users are applying it to the actual manufacture of end-use parts, so our schools are in a position to support this important trend.

Self-replicating machines have been a topic of futurists and science fiction writers. Nanotechnology shows some promise for nanoscale assembly, although practical applications of this may be many years into the future, if ever. A professor at the University of Bath in England launched an ambitious open source project a few years ago that aims to produce a macroscale self-replicating machine by additive fabrication (AF), although little evidence of actual self-replication has been demonstrated thus far.

Today, two companies offer machines that are beginning to build themselves. One year ago, EOS announced that laser sintering was used to produce 23 parts on its Formiga P 100 laser sintering system. Among the parts being produced are the filler hopper for the plastic powder, a switch cover, and pieces for a pyrometer. Last month at EuroMold 2007, Stratasys announced that fused deposition modeling (FDM) was used to manufacture 32 parts for its new FDM 900mc system. Some of the parts include the touch screen bezel, door latch filler, pull handles, status tower base, and cable strain relief bracket.

As the capabilities and materials for these machines improve, expect the number of parts that they build for themselves to increase. Will they ever be capable of producing themselves entirely? Maybe someday, but not until systems can process a very wide range of materials, including plastics, composites, and metals. Today’s machines can process plastics/composites or metals, but not both. For a long time into the future, standard parts, such as motors, gears, bearings, belts, wires, printed circuit boards, switches, fasteners, and sheet metal, will be purchased and assembled the way they have in the past.

The idea has been discussed in the past and now it’s a reality. Ed Fries, former vice president of Microsoft’s video games business, rolled out FigurePrints last week. The 9.3 million subscribers of World of Warcraft (WoW) can now order a 100 mm (4-inch) tall model of their personalized character from the online game. The models are manufactured on a 3D color printer from Z Corp. Fries was inspired by an Electronic Arts’ exhibit at the E3 show last year. The exhibit included 3D printed figures from EA’s new Spore game.
 
Fries has partnered with Blizzard Entertainment, the makers of WoW. Blizzard is expected to promote the FigurePrints service inside the game. The cost for a model of a character: $100 plus $15 for shipping.

Due to demand and other factors, the service is not rapid. Delivery takes 1-2 months from the time an order is placed. Even so, this exciting new application of additive fabrication (AF) will introduce 3D printing to millions of people. Until now, the estimated 2.3 million commercial CAD installations worldwide have been the source of data for 99 percent of the parts produced by AF technology.

FigurePrints is facing technical challenges that could adversely impact a high volume, low margin business, such as this. For example, the polygonal mesh resolution of a game character is typically not good and the mesh is often not a closed, “water tight” volume, a requirement of AF. Normally, these problems require a trained individual to review and revise the data to make it suitable for fabrication. FigurePrints will need to streamline and automate as much of it as possible and I’m sure that Ed Fries and his staff are working diligently on it.

Will the manufacturing of video game characters become a sizeable business? Yes. How quickly will it take off? FigurePrints/Blizzard and Electronic Arts (likely next year) will motivate Microsoft, Sony, LucasArts, Ubisoft, Activision, Nintendo, and others to follow. In the short term, the challenge will be to fine-tune the file processing and part finishing steps, and then build capacity. And, FigurePrints will need to turn the jobs more quickly. I suspect that many customers will not wait 30-60 days.

Historically, additive fabrication (AF) has been used for applications such as modeling, prototyping, and making patterns for silicone rubber molds. In recent years, a growing number of companies have used it for custom and replacement part manufacturing, short-run production, and even series production. Research by Wohlers Associates shows that “rapid manufacturing” using AF has grown from 3.9% in 2003 to 11.7% in 2007.

As this trend continues, we can expect to see a much wider range of audiences embrace AF for the manufacture of almost everything imaginable. This activity will be supported by AF systems that dip down to $5,000 in price. When this occurs next year, these compact manufacturing machines will show up in unexpected places. Individuals operating from a spare room in their homes will manufacture one-off parts and finished products for a broad spectrum of customers.

Growing interest in AF could lead to anyone designing anything and then having it manufactured in an affordable way for the first time. Of course, there will be limitations in size, dimensional accuracy, and material options, especially with the inexpensive systems. The biggest limitation of all will be the abilities of the people doing the design. Most consumers do not have the basic knowledge and skills to create an interesting or useful product. What’s more, the average consumer has little interest in creating new designs, let alone the desire to learn how to use design software.

Even so, entrepreneurs will capitalize on a wealth of opportunities presented by low-cost AF. As they better understand the design deficiencies among the population, they will develop approaches to personalized design and manufacturing with specific limits built into the process. Nike’s nikeid.com provides a glimpse of how this might be possible. This beautifully created website permits you to create a custom pair of shoes quickly and affordably. Within a few minutes, you can personalize shoes using a range of interesting colors and you can add a school mascot and two-digit initials to the shoes.

In the future, many websites will appear that offer libraries of objects. An individual might select a vintage car, for example, from a library of automobiles. This person will be given the opportunity to select the style of wheels, headlights, front grill, hood ornament, and color, and indicate whether it is a convertible or hardtop. The site will allow you to make other design changes, such as altering the curve of a fender, but within preset limits. Making these kinds of changes would make the model car truly custom. A few clicks later, your collectable will be in the queue for production and shipment.

Indeed, AF will be used to produce custom products by a wide range of consumers. As the price of these “personal factories” drop, the idea will expand into new businesses that may be difficult to fathom. Most consumers cannot design, so tools will become available to assist them with the process of creating one-of-a-kind products.

Note: The international conference titled The Custom Manufacturing MegaTrend: Where China and the West Fit In will be held on December 7 at EuroMold 2007 in Frankfurt, Germany.