COFES was the brainchild of long-time friends Brad Holtz of Cyon Research (the organizer of COFES), futurist Dr. Joel Orr, and Evan Yares of WTWH Media. I met Brad in July 1984 when he and Joel attended the First Annual International Forum on Micro-based CAD here in Fort Collins, Colorado. Brad and Joel met on the shuttle bus from the Denver airport to Fort Collins. Joel was our keynote speaker.

About 300 attended COFES 2012 and a significant number were top CAD/PLM industry luminaries. Brad has done an impressive job at getting the “Who’s Who” in this industry to attend year after year. Thirty-three spouses attended, including mine. Brad and his small army of staff treated us and others like royalty. The food, entertainment, and all activities associated with the event were first-class. The cost to attend COFES is $1,995 to $2,895, depending on when you register.

COFES 2012 was my fifth, if my memory serves me correctly. At most of them, including this one, Brad has invited me to host a briefing on additive manufacturing and 3D printing. A briefing is a casual gathering of 10-25 people in a hotel suite. Brad asks the hosts to start the meeting with 3-5 minutes of comments and then open up it to discussion. I always bring many AM parts to pass around, so they always generate questions and comments. Interest in the subject of 3D printing at COFES is at an all-time high.

One of the special events at COFES 2012 was a presentation by Dr. Alan Kay. He is one of the earliest pioneers of object-oriented programming, personal computing, and graphical user interfaces. Alan has been a Xerox Fellow, Chief Scientist of Atari, Apple Fellow, Disney Fellow, and HP Senior Fellow. Another special session was a “fireside chat” with Dick Morley. He is the inventor of the programmable logic controller (PLC), anti-lock brakes, and the floppy disk. I had the privilege of serving on a Society of Manufacturing Engineers’ committee with Dick for several years, so I got to know him pretty well.

Indeed, COFES is like no other event, and it is a privilege to attend and participate. People are asked to dress casually (no coats and ties), and many wear shorts and sandals. Brad knows how to create a relaxing atmosphere and get people to contribute constructively on a wide range of subjects. I go away inspired and recharged and I’m already looking forward to the next one.

The mainstream press/media has indeed discovered the technology and can’t seem to get enough of it. I was at an airport two weeks ago and randomly picked up the current issue of Forbes magazine. I thumbed through it and in seconds stumbled across an article on 3D printing.

The most talked about is the February 10, 2011 issue of The Economist. The “Print me a Stradivarius” issue showed a laser-sintered violin on the front cover and included two feature stories. I did not learn until much later that the articles were written by Paul Markillie, innovation editor at the magazine. Markillie attended our 13th annual additive manufacturing conference at EuroMold 2011, so I had the pleasure of meeting him.

In the current (April 21-27) issue of The Economist, Markillie authored a special 14-page spread of eight finely-written articles on the digitization of manufacturing and how it will transform the way products are made. Most of them discuss AM and 3D printing, some in great depth. With “The third industrial revolution” spread across the front cover, I suspect that this issue will bring even more attention to the technology than the one published 14 months earlier.

Last Thursday, Bloomberg Businessweek published a multi-page story titled 3D Printers: Make Whatever You Want. It discusses the technology’s history, its many applications, and where it’s headed. The depth and breadth of the article are impressive and author Ashlee Vance clearly did his homework. Rumor has it that a story on 3D printing will soon appear in an issue of SmartMoney, a publication by The Wall Street Journal.

Almost weekly, I am reading about the technology in an on-line article or blog from a mainstream publisher. An example is an article that Forbes ran recently titled 3D Printing Industry Will Reach $3.1 Billion Worldwide by 2016. Television news programs are also covering the subject and we can expect a lot more in the future. CNN, Canada’s Business News Network (BNN), Sky News in Australia, and many regional and local broadcasts have featured the technology.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) also has a technical committee on additive manufacturing, called TC 261, with an almost identical focus and charge. Many of the same people and organizations are a part of it and the F42 committee. As one might expect, two “competing” standards groups involving the same people could lead to confusion and other problems.

To reduce and potentially eliminate opposing standards and duplication of effort, the leadership from the two committees discussed the need to cooperate. These discussions were then elevated to the top management at ASTM and ISO, which resulted in an agreement that is a first between the two organizations. It was signed in September 2011 by the ISO secretary general and ASTM International president.

This unprecedented agreement means that TC 261 can apply a “fast track” process to existing ASTM F42 standards, making them ISO standards quickly. Likewise, ASTM can easily adopt ISO TC 261 standards. The collaboration especially encourages the development of joint ISO/ASTM standards. In each of these cases, the two organizations can co-brand the additive manufacturing standards. In the process, a co-branded standard replaces a standard that would otherwise be published exclusively by ISO or ASTM.

This collaboration, in my opinion, is an important milestone in the additive manufacturing industry. It will result in standards that will be adopted much more widely here in the U.S. and around the world. Also, it should reduce conflict, and conflicting standards, between the ISO and ASTM committees on additive manufacturing. This collaboration is new to both organizations, so difficulties will likely develop, but with support at all levels in both organizations, these problems will be overcome.

The plan is expected to bring together industry, universities, community colleges, federal agencies, and states to accelerate innovation. It hopes to 1) bridge the gap between basic research and product development, 2) provide shared assets to help small manufacturers access cutting-edge capabilities and equipment, and 3) create an unparalleled environment to educate and train students and the workforce in advanced manufacturing skills. The press release states that this model has been successfully deployed in other countries and represents a gap in U.S. manufacturing innovation.

The White House presented three broad areas of opportunities, one of which is 3D printing (aka, additive manufacturing). In my opinion, this is big, and it is likely the first time any Administration in Washington has acknowledged the existence of the technology. The announcement underscores the importance of refining standards, materials, and equipment for 3D printing to enable low-cost, small batch production using digital designs that can be transmitted from designers located anywhere.

The other two areas of opportunity cited in the announcement: 1) the development of lightweight materials, such as low-cost carbon fiber composites that improve fuel efficiency, performance, and corrosion resistance for next generation automobiles, aircraft, ships and trains, and 2) creating a smart manufacturing infrastructure and approaches that make real-time use of “big data” flows from fully-instrumented plants in order to improve productivity, optimize supply chains, and improve the use of energy, water, and materials. Interestingly, additive manufacturing technology can also play a significant role in these two areas.

Regardless of one’s political affiliation, I believe this announcement is very important. It brings much-needed attention to product development and manufacturing and proposes a way to invigorate an industry that could use a boost. Converting raw materials of relatively low value into products of relatively high value is a way of creating wealth for organizations, individuals, and entire nations. I applaud the White House for this initiative.

The book takes you back to before the birth of Jobs, why he was adopted, and his years growing up. Jobs fully cooperated with Isaacson as he compiled astonishing detail and anecdotes for the book. And, Jobs never asked to see a draft of what he had written. Isaacson was brutally candid, revealing the great achievements of Jobs, as well as his many quirks, odd habits, and sometimes shocking personality. It ends with his most recent efforts at Apple a short time before he died in October 2011.

The book is one of the most intriguing I’ve read in a long time. What I found most interesting was how Jobs was so exceedingly engaged with almost every factor associated with the development of a new product. Even in his last years, he would get involved at the detailed level, such as a subtle curve on the external housing of the iPhone or iPad. He would agonize over the smallest of details, such as the shape of a simple button on a screen. Undeniably, he was as “hands-on” as any CEO can get and he influenced nearly everything associated with the company and its products and services.

I regret not meeting Jobs when I had a chance back in the late 1980s while attending a National Computer Graphics Association (NCGA) exposition. He was then CEO of Pixar, a company that produced Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and many other animated hits. Pixar had a large exhibit at the NCGA show and Jobs was present. I was visiting an adjacent exhibit, but didn’t make my way over to meet him, and I regret it to this day.

If you want to better understand Steve Jobs and what he did to make Apple arguably the most successful high tech company in the world, read this book. It had my attention the entire way through and I learned a lot from it. Steve Jobs is a book that I will probably read again someday. It’s that good.

“How are you getting along? I have read each issue of your reports carefully and feel that they are wonderful and outstanding. Would you like to cooperate with me? Nowadays, Chinese government has released a new policy to attract foreign experts with very high salary (1 million RMB a year, ten times higher than ordinary professors in China). The only limitations are that the proposer must be below 65 years old and he/she must work at least 9 months a year in China (from 2012.1 to 2014). Would you like to have a try? You are welcome to China and I am looking forward to hearing from you.”

It got my attention, not because I was interested in the offer, but because of what the Chinese government is now doing to accelerate its standing in science and technology. Having been told years ago how much a Chinese university professor receives annually, I knew that it was not a lot, by U.S. standards. Ten times this amount, though, might interest some people. One million Chinese yuan (RMB) is about $159,000, which could attract bright, energetic, and reasonably well-connected and experienced professionals. It could certainly be an interesting and educational three years for them.

I thanked the person inviting me and politely declined. I bumped into her at EuroMold five weeks later and it became entirely clear that the invitation was indeed sincere. One can only guess how many similar invitations, maybe hundreds or thousands, that have gone to others. It’s an alarming strategy that China has put in place.

This year, we were treated to Mike Rowe of the Discovery Channel’s Dirty Jobs. Mike has been involved in 300 “dirty jobs” in all 50 states and is an exceptionally bright guy that’s down to earth. He discussed the mounting skills gap and pointed out that we no longer have only white and blue collar workers in the U.S. He stressed that there’s many important “middle ground” positions and addressed the need to recognize them and the people needed to fill them.

Tony Fadell, formerly of Apple, was another special guest speaker. Tony is considered by many as the “father” of the iPod and served as senior vice president of the iPod Division at Apple. He also led the team that developed the iPhone. Tony mentioned the arguments he had with Steve Jobs over making the iPod compatible with Windows. I told him that I was reading the Steve Jobs book and he smiled, signifying that we were both aware of Steve Jobs’ interesting management style at Apple. Tony is surprisingly young (born in 1969), and in 2010, he founded a company named NEST that’s creating a product for consumers. You might be surprised, as I was, to learn that it’s a thermostat for homes, a product that’s more exciting than it sounds.

A third special guest speaker was Ben Kaufman, the founder and head of Quirky. The web company is focused on accepting new product ideas from anyone and then taking some of the best to market. Ben said that they receive about 200-300 ideas for new products every day and two of them are selected for development each week. Quirky has a team of people that advance the ideas, along with many others who contribute to the effort. The result is the commercialization of one product every week. I asked Ben how many of the products are successful and how they measure success. He responded by saying that all of them are successful at some level, although only a few of the products find their way into stores such as Walmart or Target, in the case of consumer products.

SolidWorks World 2012, for me, ended before the final day because I had to wing my way to another event near the east coast. I was lucky enough to attend the Tuesday evening Block Party at The Gaslamp Quarter in San Diego. I can’t imagine the total cost of this three-hour party for 5,000+ SolidWorks enthusiasts. SolidWorks Corp. knows how to treat its customers and how to create world-class software that gets them excited. SolidWorks World 2013, set for January 20-23 in Orlando, Florida, was announced by CEO Bertrand Sicot on Wednesday.

Over the years, Kalil has led many White House technology initiatives. Examples are the Next Generation Internet and the National Nanotechnology Initiative. He has also addressed the growing imbalance between support for biomedical research and for the physical sciences and engineering. Clearly, he has many achievements to his name and is well connected and respected.

Tim Caffrey, associate consultant here at Wohlers Associates, and I had the opportunity to meet with Kalil at OSTP in mid-December 2011. In preparation for the meeting, we tried to do our “homework” on Kalil and his interests in engineering and manufacturing in general and additive manufacturing and 3D printing in particular. What struck me most about Kalil is his understanding of AM and his appreciation for its potential impact on design, innovation, entrepreneurship, business, and advanced manufacturing. His passion for the DIY maker community is depicted in his September 29, 2010 opening remarks on innovation, education, and the maker movement at an NSF-sponsored workshop held after Maker Faire New York.

I am encouraged by Kalil’s views, opinions, and focus and where Washington would like to help take U.S. science and technology in the future. We are lucky to have an individual like Kalil who understands the power of design creativity and business opportunities that are being unleashed by AM. Also, he knows many of the top thinkers and opinion leaders in additive manufacturing, the maker community, and STEM education. Tim and I did not spend time explaining the technology or its impact. He gets it. Instead we could concentrate on what needs to be done and how our nation might get there.

In mid-December, after returning from a trip to Washington, DC, I felt a familiar discomfort, but this time on my right side. I soon knew that it was a disc rupture, although I later found out that it was a different disc. It was my belief that stretching and walking were the most effective two years ago, so that’s what I began immediately. Some days, it would feel better, so then I would try running or going to the gym for strength training. Both aggravated the problem further and were probably a mistake. I continued the stretching and walking routine, but it progressively got worse. By the middle part of last week, I hadn’t sat down for more than a total of 10 minutes over a span of 10 days because it was so uncomfortable. I purchased an excellent sit-stand workstation product from Ergotron, which I recommend highly to those who want to stand and sit at work. Within 2 seconds, your monitor, keyboard, mouse, and a work platform can be in either position.

While tying a shoe last Wednesday, excruciating pain shot through my lower back, hip, and leg. It was the most discomfort I had ever experienced, and it lasted what seemed like an eternity. My wife was nearby and tried to help, but there was little she could do. I took some Vicodin, which helped a little, and then made arrangements to see the neurosurgeon I saw two years earlier. The trips to and from his office were horrible. I took some Valium and steroids that he gave me while I was in his office, yet I still couldn’t put any weight on my right side. The pain was just too intense. After taking even more Valium, I eventually made it to the parking lot and car with assistance from my wife. Later that day, I had an MRI that showed the location and severity of the disc rupture. Surgery would reduce the possibility of permanent nerve damage and provide relief from the pain.

The next day wasn’t much better, even with all the pain medicine, so I felt I had little choice but to have surgery. We were able to schedule the procedure, called a lumbar laminectomy, for Friday. I was in the operating room for about an hour and at home walking three hours later. The doctor instructed me to walk 1 mile (1.6 km) that day, 2 miles yesterday, and 3 miles today. All of the pain is gone, except for the area of the incision. My leg is weak and part of the shin is still numb, but I should be able to snow ski again in about one month. Surgery was my last choice, but I’m glad I had it done. I can now sit, walk, and sleep again and I feel very good.

It was in Columbus that we learned more about the AMC. According to Dr. Ian Harris, AMC director and EWI technology leader, the consortium was developed in response to a need for collaboration, including design allowable data. The focus of the AMC is to advance the manufacturing readiness of AM technologies and to generate precompetitive data to benefit its members. The AMC was largely inspired by the Roadmap for Additive Manufacturing, a document developed in 2009 with participation from 65 experts in academia, industry, and government. Wohlers Associates enjoyed playing an active role in this national effort. One of the goals of the AMC is to organize a National Test Bed Center that includes extensive equipment and staff resource capabilities, which was one of the roadmap recommendations.

The AMC currently consists of 28 partners from the U.S. government, private sector, and research. Among them are the Air Force, Army, Boeing, GE, General Dynamics, Goodrich, Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, NASA, and Northrop Grumman. Wohlers Associates is the newest partner of the Additive Manufacturing Consortium. We are excited about the opportunity of helping the AMC achieve its goals and advance AM to a new level.