Ed brings up an interesting point. My company, for example is heavily
engaged in grant funded research relating to direct manufacturing
applications using RP technology. We are also involved in system
integration including 3D scanning and virtual prototyping. All of this is
considered by our firm as highly proprietary. I am sure that we are not
alone on this issue within the RP community. So the question is, how do we
share ideas and information that could benefit the industry as a whole
without jeopardizing company proprietary information? Without some
mechanism in place, the sessions as proposed will be limited to academics
and members of the community that are not directly engaged in the cutting
edge areas under discussion. I know there are a number of others who
monitor the list, but as a rule do not comment on these issues because of
these reasons. For example, let's hear from the equipment and materials
suppliers as well as the Fortune 500 users?
Ronald Jones
Shared Replicators, Inc.
www.sharedreplicators.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <EdGrenda@aol.com>
To: <igibson@hkucc.hku.hk>; <rp-ml@bart.lpt.fi>
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: RP Forum, 'The future of RP'
> In a message dated 00-10-26 21:59:56 EDT, igibson@hkucc.hku.hk writes:
>
> << So far I have had offers to convene sessions on
>
> - RP and Architecture
> - Rapid Tooling, which looks like it may be split into 2 sub-areas.
> - RP and Architecture
> - RP and the Internet
> - Integrated systems
>
> I think we should also continue the discussion on RP and Art. I also plan
> to continue the discussion on Colour RP. Any other suggestions?
> >>
>
> Dear Ian:
>
> Two obvious areas of future importance are direct fabrication, i.e., using
RP
> as a manufacturing means, and medical applications of RP. The latter
should
> probably emphasize advanced work in tissue engineering and similar areas.
> Lately I've been learning about some approaches and ideas that make me
think
> that organ generation may not be as far away as we may have thought.
>
> Perhaps another area for discussion is the arrow of technology
development.
> In the fabulous fifties you had to be a wealthy, technologically advanced
> corporation to operate a TV studio. Today you can buy much better
capability
> for short money at Circuit City and carry it in your briefcase. Just how
do
> we put excellent RP capabilities within the grasp of essentially every
> interested PC user, and when (not if) that happens, what does it imply?
> Think Quadra.
>
> Scientific visualization and anthropological applications have been broad,
> but not deep. We should try to find out why and discuss where this is
> leading. Answering the needs of potential users in these multifarious
> applications could possibly open up a number of new market areas for the
> technology and force its development. How - and can - this be
proselytized?
>
> What is the relationship between RP and virtual prototyping? How will
these
> two fields develop in parallel and what are the applications of RP that
will
> eventually be supplanted by virtual prototyping? What are the
applications
> that can't?
>
> What needs to be done to make RP an answer to the needs of every
industrial
> designer? Architecture seems easy in comparison.
>
>
> Of course, if I knew the answers to these questions, I'd never tell. In
> fact, I can't believe I'm even asking the questions. That would seem to
be a
> problem with such discussions, but that's what academia is for. At least,
> that's what I read some place.
>
> Best regards,
> Ed
>
> Ed Grenda
> Castle Island Co.
> 19 Pondview Road
> Arlington, MA 02474 USA
> 781-646-6280 (voice or fax)
> EdGrenda@aol.com (email)
> http://home.att.net/~castleisland/
>
>
> 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 - 23:04:36 EEST