> Phil
>
> I would hope that the use of additive systems will not only prove to be an
> economic solution for certain components while permitting highly evolved
> free form designs, but will also enable previous assemblies of separate
> components to be manufactured in single units thus much reducing the total
> part count within designs. Perhaps this factor itself will significantly
> skew the economies and arguments for the use of RP in higher volume
> instances ?. Naturally this assumes the same rate of advance in materials
> and processing that has taken place in the last 10 yrs will be sustained
> in the future - but I see no reason why this should not be the case.
>
> I would also argue that the current cost of these systems (lets say that
> this is 10 times their manufacturing value) will fall dramatically once
> the financial outlay of the companies and investors involved is secured
> and the multi nationals put their economies of scale behind the operation.
> The current system user base will also shift towards the individual (not
> necessarily home but certainly small business for everyday use rather than
> just prototypes) as computing power and CAD become cheaper and more
> intuitive (look at the capabilities and price of the next generation of
> gaming consoles coming from Japan !).
>
> Regards
> Ben Halford
> PERA Technology
> England
> ben.halford@pera.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prof P. M. Dickens [SMTP:pdickens@dmu.ac.uk]
> Sent: 15 December 1998 16:32
> To: 'lblasch@opw-fc.com'
> Cc: rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: Future of RP Re:Further Comments
>
> Larry has some very good points here. I think we need to take a step back
> and try and think where we are going with this.
>
> Large Numbers
> It is very unlikely that we will use these additive techniques for making
> parts in large numbers (e.g. hundreds of thousands or more) as we have
> many
> conventional processes that have been developed for this.
>
> Mass Customisation
> I believe that we will see quite soon the existing additive techniques
> being used to manufacture real parts. This is most likely going to be for
> applications where the parts are purely functional and not for aesthetic
> applications. Aesthetic parts will come later.
>
> Medium Volume
> This is the really interesting area because there is more of a challenge
> here be cause the economics become more critical. I see no reason why we
> will not be using the existing techniques to manufacture functional parts
> in volumes up to tens of thousands within the next few years.
>
> Design Implications
> I agree with Larry that we should not be trying to do what other processes
>
> are already doing successfully. There may well be economic advantages of
> using the additive processes to replace injection moulding for low to
> medium volumes. The main benefit though will be in the effect on the
> design
> process. As Marshall Burns said we are now in a 'Fabber revolution'. This
> is important because we now have a set of manufacturing processes that are
>
> not limited in terms of the geometry that can be produced. This will have
> an enormous effect on the design processes of the future. We have
> undertaken a vast amount of research into techniques such as Design for
> Assembly, Design for Manufacture etc. These were largely necessary because
>
> of geometry limitations. We are getting close to the point where as
> manufacturing engineers we can say to designers 'stop worrying about how
> we
> will make it just design it as you want it'!
>
> Material Implications
> It is clear from the work presented at the Texas Symposium that we will
> have a new wide range of materials - plastics, ceramics, metals. These
> will
> include:
> New materials (especially composites)
> Controlled porosity (shape and amount - filters)
> Graded materials
>
> Manufacturing Implications
> For the first time we will have true flexible manufacturing systems where
> we can change product geometry randomly without affecting efficiency.
> There
> will be less tooling and hence shorter lead times and lower investment in
> tools. There is the possibility of producing everything Just in Time,
> which
> will lead to less work in progress and less storage requirements. This
> will
> lead to easier production planning. The reduction in tooling will lead to
> random product scheduling and easy changes to production schedules.
>
> Sales Implications
> It will be possible to make custom products cheaper with shorter lead
> times
> from order to delivery and the customer can be more involved in the
> design.
>
> I would be very interested in other peoples thoughts on this.
>
> Prof. Phill Dickens
> De Montfort University
> Leicester
> England
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lblasch@opw-fc.com [SMTP:lblasch@opw-fc.com]
> Sent: 14 December 1998 10:29
> To: rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi; themissinglink@eznetinc.com;
> michel.gilio@mail.mech.kuleuven.ac.be
> Subject: Re[2]: Future of RP Re:Further Comments
>
>
> Michel,
> Steve,
> List,
>
> There may be many products that one could produce using RP machines as the
> manufacturing process, you only need to look at the plastic-ware isle of
> any
> department store to find 10,000 different designs of containers for
> storing
> things...these tend to be one or two piece products, and RP can handle
> them
> rather well.
>
> The big problem with personal manufacturing is dealing with assembly and
> fine
> tuning of a product to acheive the desired function. Products that do not
> require this activity could and would be the first step in adopting such a
> fabrication device at the supplier or even the consumer level.
>
> Question: Would you buy a car made by a process that required you to
> return
> to
> the manufacturer for all repairs? What if you move away, trade in the car?
>
> There are custom car builders now that hand build to your specs. but it
> takes
> time and costs a lot and replacement parts are a problem.
>
> The existing manufacturing processes would be more likely to incorporate
> RP
> as a
> production method if the materials and properties of the RP parts were
> exploited. We are presently trying to get the RP machines to replicate
> existing
> materials and processes much the way PLASTICS were applied in the
> 1950-60's.
>
> Instead of designing the products and or parts to be made with RP, we try
> to get
> RP parts to replicate other processes. Once engineers discovered that
> there
> were
> different design methods and processes that needed to be used when working
>
> with
> plastics, the plastic market exploded.
>
> The way a manufacturing process is applied is much more important then
> what
> it
> can do.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Larry Blasch
> System Administrator for Engineering Services
>
> OPW Fueling Components Voice: (513) 870-3356
> P.O. Box 405003 Fax: (513) 870-3338
> Cincinnati, OH 45240-5003 USA
> *********************************************************************
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> *****
> Larry,
> Steve,
>
> I think the automobile was not that good an example for explaining what
> Steve
> meant.
> But I'd like to stress the fact that industry is heading towards a
> complete
> on-demand production. Producing on demand means that you can shrink your
> stocks of finished products, and thus your immobilized capital. Now, if
> your
> customer also wants the product delivered as soon as possible, RP&M is the
> solution for decreasing total throughpout times for more and more products
>
> made
> on smaller and smaller scales.
>
> Regards,
> Michel
>
> --
> Michel Gilio
> Research Engineer
> Division PMA - K.U.Leuven
> Celestijnenlaan 300 B
> B-3001 Heverlee
>
> tel: +32 16 32 27 72 fax: +32 16 32 29 87
> e-mail: michel.gilio@mech.kuleuven.ac.be
> http://www.mech.kuleuven.ac.be/pma/pma.html
>
>
>
> For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
>
>
> For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
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 - 22:47:40 EEST