3D printing. We are entering an era where we cannot mass produce anymore. We will have to rely on repairs. And 3D printing is an excellent way to replace broken parts of what we buy.
Open source hardware can easily become the norm. If your product comes with a 3D plan of every parts of it then it should be promoted by governments, by reducing taxes on your product for example. On top of that this technology can easily be used locally.
There’s a fair amount of waste involved in 3D printing (support structures for example), as well as expertise needed to figure out tolerances and quirks of an individual printer. There’s also an argument that we need improvements in 3D printing that would allow us to use metal (sintering) instead of plastic (extruding or UV exposure) both for sustainability and structural reasons.
I’d agree that 3D printing has a much higher potential than it currently is used for, but let’s not pretend it’s a cure-all for consumerism.
This waste is also present in traditional injection molding in the form of sprues, runners, and gates (probably less, though it depends on the site specifics).
Other people have already addressed the waste portion of your argument. The part that I’d like to address is the “expertise needed”. I completely agree with how difficult it can be to learn. I mean, just calibrating your printer can be a whole job. However, I don’t think it’s necessarily something that everyone would have to have a printer to get the benefits of the tech. I already see many people that sell “3D-Printing services” I have my own 3D-printer, but I have even paid people to print certain things for me. If people can find 3D-printable files (thangs, printables, thingiverse) then they can get someone to pay for much cheaper and faster than ordering a rare part overseas.
3D printing. We are entering an era where we cannot mass produce anymore. We will have to rely on repairs. And 3D printing is an excellent way to replace broken parts of what we buy.
Open source hardware can easily become the norm. If your product comes with a 3D plan of every parts of it then it should be promoted by governments, by reducing taxes on your product for example. On top of that this technology can easily be used locally.
There’s a fair amount of waste involved in 3D printing (support structures for example), as well as expertise needed to figure out tolerances and quirks of an individual printer. There’s also an argument that we need improvements in 3D printing that would allow us to use metal (sintering) instead of plastic (extruding or UV exposure) both for sustainability and structural reasons.
I’d agree that 3D printing has a much higher potential than it currently is used for, but let’s not pretend it’s a cure-all for consumerism.
This waste is also present in traditional injection molding in the form of sprues, runners, and gates (probably less, though it depends on the site specifics).
Yeah, anyone who thinks that 3d printers are the answer to everything hasn’t spent weeks trying to calibrate the damn things.
Other people have already addressed the waste portion of your argument. The part that I’d like to address is the “expertise needed”. I completely agree with how difficult it can be to learn. I mean, just calibrating your printer can be a whole job. However, I don’t think it’s necessarily something that everyone would have to have a printer to get the benefits of the tech. I already see many people that sell “3D-Printing services” I have my own 3D-printer, but I have even paid people to print certain things for me. If people can find 3D-printable files (thangs, printables, thingiverse) then they can get someone to pay for much cheaper and faster than ordering a rare part overseas.