On Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 6:17:21 AM UTC-7, rangerssuck wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 10:16:11 PM UTC-4, jon_banquer wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 7:08:47 PM UTC-7, rangerssuck wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 9:54:28 PM UTC-4, jon_banquer wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 6:00:22 PM UTC-7, rangerssuck wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 7:15:28 PM UTC-4, jon_banquer wrote:
The world has changed and many have had enough of Pay 4 Play liars like slow eddy.

https://www.linkedin.com/grp/post/45...05975009292291

I dunno Jon, I read your Linkedin page, and I didn't see any "admissions" from anyone. I saw a discussion of the limitations of poorly thought out 3d prints which produce parts that can't be machined efficiently. The same could easily be said about ANY poorly designed part regardless of the techniques involved.

That said, I spent the day yesterday at the Javits Center in NY attending the MD&M show http://mdmeast.mddionline.com . I spoke with plenty of manufacturers who use 3D printers to generate mold patterns, proofs of concept and finished products. These are real companies producing real products.

So, perhaps 3d printing has been overhyped in your world, but it certainly has not been in the world of medical devices - the surface is only beginning to be scratched.

What's a LinkedIn page? You mean my LinkedIn group? If that is what you mean suggest you review the membership of my group. It's a virtual who's who of the CADCAM biz. Lots of discussions on the problems with 3D printing and why it's so over-hyped and the problems it's causing CADCAM.

Suggest you also review Seeking Alpha to see what stock holders think of a troubled 3D Systems.

You seem to mistakenly think I don't like 3D printing or that I don't feel it's viable. What you and others here are missing is that CADCAM companies don't want to fix their badly broken basics and instead want to focus on 3D printing. There is no venture capital available for new and better CADCAM as VC's think it's a solved problem. Nothing could be further from the truth.

OK. I read the web page that you posted the link to, and I didn't see anyone "admitting" anything. I saw a discussion of the limitations of poorly thought out 3d prints which produce parts that can't be machined efficiently. The same could easily be said about ANY poorly designed part regardless of the techniques involved.

If there is a problem with the CAM software available, then why don't you just say so, rather than "More people step up and admit 3D printing is over-hyped?" You seem to be saying that CAM software is lacking BECAUSE of 3D printing, and that simply makes no sense at all.

I am by no means an expert in this field. My 35 years' experience is in design of electronic systems. I work closely with mechanical designers and while I have some understanding of what they do, I don't pretend to be able to do it myself. OTOH, when I need to bang out a single piece of something, I either 3D print it or make it on my non-CNC mill and lathe.

If CAM software is really so lacking, why don't you and your "who's who" of the CADCAM biz get together and hire yourselves some programming staff and kick the asses of the existing companies? From what you say, there's a tremendous market waiting to be served.

So what part of what this guy wrote don't you understand?

"The trouble I feel with 3D Printing is that it is giving people false hope in getting things to market faster. Designers think that if they can print it, you can manufacture it conventionally. I agree that it is useful to see what a component actually looks like in the real world, and to get a physical feel, but it doesn't mean you can actually manufacture it in volume. Undercuts get overlooked, split lines get missed, inaccessible features are modelled in, inconsistent wall thicknesses, the list goes on. I see this far too often, and I'm afraid to say that it is taking longer, and putting more owness on the manufacturer to explain the problems, and the designers that 3D printing is creating is causing a lot of headaches. I see it all too often. It's causing problems that would never of normally been overlooked and be designed out."

I understand all of it, Jon. And I don't disagree with any of it. But:
a) I STILL don't see anyone "admitting" anything.

b) It is not the fault of 3-D printing that these mistakes are getting made. A lousy design is a lousy design, no matter what tools were used to create it. That some people are producing crap on 3-D printers does not mean that the technology is at fault.

There are plenty of people producing good, useful parts on the same printers, BTW, this week I saw a 3-D printer that embeds carbon fiber and/or Kevlar into nylon prints. This makes for some super tough parts that would most certainly be useful in fixturing applications.

c) Again, there seems to be, according to you (I wouldn't know, only being tangentially involved in the field) a gaping hole in the available software. If your LinkedIn group really does have all the heavyweights in the field as members, why not put together a group to produce software that will fill such gaping holes?

What part of this don't you understand?


I understand that you don't grasp what the problems are. Not really sure what I can do about that.

3D carbon fiber printer? The one I was first to discuss in this group? That 3D carbon fiber printer?

I already explained why the basics in CAD, that have been broken for so long, aren't getting fixed. I see no reason to go over this again.