Determining which RP conference to attend has become more difficult each
year due to the agenda and the expectations of the attendants. While each
user must make the choice to attend or not sometimes it is made by
management if some justification does not exist. Developing agendas for
such event can be a huge task. Trying to meet each user's need as well as
expectation can be extremely difficult. Add vendors and suppliers to that
list and the task seems to become impossible. While trying to reconcile the
discussions about the sagging RP acceptance and conference attendance one
could assume that a new venue might produce excitement and renewed interest.
The largest RP event of the year is the Society of Manufacturing Engineer's
Spring Rapid Prototyping and Manufacturing Conference. This event tries to
bring all American RP vendors, suppliers, service bureaus and users
together for a three-day conference and trade show. Attendance at this
event seemed to peak at around 2500 attendees. The top four other events
are held by academic sponsors; The University of Dayton, The University of
Texas at Austin, Georgia Tech and the University of Nottingham. Some of
the earlier meetings were sponsored by the users of individual technology
such as The 3D North American Stereolithography User Group, Selective Laser
Sintering User Group, The Fused Deposition System User Group, and The LOM
User Groups. At these events the focus is entirely on the individual
technology and it's users. To add to the offerings other universities
sponsor RP events such as special topic seminars and workshops.
When looking at whether a new event could be justified, some pointed out
that "The challenge is to make the most of what we already have before
diving into another commitment. Others readily agreed to a new event, "I
like the idea. It would blow my budget, but I would be there."
Considering the work involved in putting together a new event, it is best
to identify the shortcoming of other events to ensure success.
The best statement describing the current problem was " You seen one,
you've practically seen them all" or " the same presenters at the same
venues speaking to the same participants about the same subjects?"
Therefor it becomes difficult to justify conference attendance while
hearing the same talks time and time again. Conference organizer must
realize that many times the attendant is expected to return to work and
make RP produce even better results. Low attendance seems to indicate that
the educational value of some events has weakened due to a weak agenda.
Completing an agenda is a frustrating task. Besides the fear of speaking
in front of large audiences, several other reasons appear to influence
participation. As one user said "Nothing new developing or we're doing
more of the same with some refinements, so who wants to hear it again?"
Others added that the "SHARING on a USER-LEVEL is less in the age of
"proprietary processes" and questioned if an event based solely around
users would lead to " a new level of openness in RP?" Many doubt that it
would and others went even further stating that "it would be nice to be
able to hold such a conference without solicitation and but voiced doubts
about attendance if the conference was advertised stating no vendor
exhibits will be included." Several people pointed out how "the market is
so competitive and with three users groups there is lots of wasted and
duplicated effort. Of course you cannot get good speakers at every event
since that only provides too many of the same thing." However most agreed
that even with machine-specific user groups, university and SME-RPA
conventions are not delivering what is expected.
It was pointed out that the RP&M conferences might work to provide more
focus on user-related topics and this would be easier than starting another
user's group meeting. One suggested that a conference (perhaps also in
conjunction with SME/RPA show) geared toward educating potential users of
RP services and highlighting the unique services and specialties of various
service bureaus would be beneficial and help boost the RP industry overall.
Others pointed out that students and young engineers would especially
benefit from an educational focus like this - they are the future (or
current) movers and shakers and will use the technology if given the
knowledge and opportunity.
Timing does not seem to be a big problem but location and the associated
costs of transportation, conference fees, lodging, and food appear to be
significant. With the downturn in the world markets, the attendance from
abroad is sure to be reduced. The economic factors may not affect US
travelers getting to events outside the US instead getting management
approval is the major roadblock. While most US companies consider
themselves "global" it is not reflected in their attitude towards travel.
Most management view foreign travel as unnecessary or vacation junkets.
Everyone agrees that attendees of a user's group have different reasons
and expectations for attending such an event. Some come for problem
solving, some for education, some for networking etc. 3DNASUG for us has
been very beneficial for all of these.
To share technical information across platforms would be beneficial for
those users with multiple platforms, but seems to be a waste of time for
those specializing in one platform. To share trade secrets, tricks,
techniques, and information among users of the same technology without
compromising business opportunities is a difficult problem. How much of
your knowledge do you give away to the competition in the interest of
helping other users? This problem would be significantly greater in a
multi-platform environment. It is also a problem for the RP equipment
vendors.
Where we RP'ers mutually need help is in the area of education and sales
to the potential users of the products of our technology and perhaps to the
potential new users and new comers to the field. It seems to me, the most
benefit to be gained would be from a conference designed around these
needs. Presentations could focus on the various processes, costs, and case
studies. Displays could exhibit our best parts, unique applications, and
innovations in rapid tooling.
If the conference where educationally focused and not a users group, we
would be willing to participate/present as experts in stereolithography
acknowledging its advantages and disadvantages provided there were lots of
students, engineers, and project managers attending.
*******************************************************************
Opinions, suggestions, and other controversial matter VOID where prohibited.
******************************************************************
Elaine T. Hunt, Director
Clemson University Laboratory to Advance Industrial Prototyping
206 Fluor Daniel Bldg. Clemson, SC 29643-0925
864-656-0321 (voice) 864-656-4435 (fax)
elaine.hunt@ces.clemson.edu
http://chip.eng.clemson.edu/rp/persall/elaine.html
For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:46:42 EEST