Re: Nice.....but...... RE: [rp-ml] Stratasys stock soars on news of 3-D printer deal with Hewlett-Packard

From: Kevin Hawkinson <khawki02_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu Jan 21 2010 - 23:44:06 EET

I currently have a 3D part file open on my desktop, and I'm producing a 2D
drawing for machining.
At least one aspect of this part shouldn't be described in the 2D drawing,
because it takes a CNC mill to cut this feature.
However, I need to communicate tolerances and finishes in a user-friendly
format.
So, I'll be making a 2D appendix to a 3D electronic file, which will contain
enough information to machine the casting.

As a side note, none of the machinists that I've talked to so far fully
understand GD&T, and neither do I.

I'd like to see a 4D format that contains information about how an object
develops.
For example, if I start with a casting, or a forging, or a solid block, or a
vat of resin, or a spool of ABS filament,
then how is material added or removed through the various processes to
obtain the object in its final shape?
And then what are the characteristics of the object?

Just my .02
Kevin Hawkinson
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Markus Hitter <mah@jump-ing.de> wrote:

>
> Am 21.01.2010 um 16:46 schrieb Jeremy Pullin:
>
> why on earth would you want
>> to replace the 2D document.
>>
>
>
> - 3D is "native" which means it's the same type of geometry the final part
> uses.
>
> - Describing 3D geometry in 2D isn't always possible, think of freeform
> surfaces.
>
> - Describing 3D geometry in 2D (drawing) is work which can be avoided.
>
> That said I fully agree with you where producing textual descriptions in 3D
> just to have 3D is nonsense.
>
>
> Markus
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter
> http://www.jump-ing.de/
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Jan 21 23:53:52 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Mar 11 2011 - 05:24:18 EET