A lot of models and designs on Shapeways are immediately interesting. You can see from the thumbnail that this is going to be a fun, others are not so obvious. 

Take Edward Hibberd(ARHib)'s Kweijebo model. Look closely, the description should get your blood flowing though, "Antweight class robot 106g." Antweight is a "class of fighting robots under 150g." These tiny, light mean machines battle it out and Andrew made a chassis & body for one with Shapeways! This stuff really makes our day! Check out his awesome robot in action below.

That disc on the front, spins at 12,000 RPM! You can check out more pictures on the forum. Andrew has been building robots for five years and we hope he does really well in competition!

Arno just discovered a contextual ad fail. It is on the Netherlands' most popular news site nu.nl. The encircled ad is for a trip to Mexico. The article is about the Dutch government telling people not to go to Mexico. The ad is currently still live on the page, LOL. This is the second time we've discovered an ad fail too.

Maker Faire is an incredibly fun and creative event for people who 'hack' technology and hardware. Last year there were 500 makers there and 65,000 visitors. The makers exhibit anything from robots to musical instruments to knitwear. You can check out a video from last year below to get an impression.  

Shapeways is going to go the Bay Area Maker Faire on the 30-31st of May. If you're there come meet us! 

To inspire people we would like to show off the best models that you can possibly make. Something that will make people go wow! Something that explains how 3D printing will change things. Something that someone will look at, hold in their hand and go..you can make this? 

The Maker Faire contest is your chance to have your most amazing design made. Anything you want, anything that you think will inspire and amaze is game. The top 3 models will be 3D printed, exhibited at Maker Faire and then sent to the lucky winners. The winning designer gets an additional $300 in 3D printing from us.

The fine print: The contest closes the 15th of May. Enter by adding the tag: makerfaire to your upload. Your model has to be less expensive than $200.     

Enrico Dini dreamt of buildings, construction and impossible shapes. He was particularly inspired by Gaudi's architecture and loved his fantastic(in every sense) work. He became a Civil engineer and later branched out into making machines. All the while dreaming of those impossible shapes.

Traditional building methods tend to reel in dreamers outlandish dreams though. Building with concrete and brick require scaffolding and a lot of manpower. This creates constraints. These constraints limit the way in which buildings can be constructed and limit the shapes and forms that architects can use. Rather than accept these constraints as a given Enrico set out to completely remove them. In 2004 he invented and patented a full scale 3D printing method that used epoxy to bind sand. Enrico could now 3D print buildings. 

As Shapeways community members who have experimented with resin molds know, epoxy resin can stick to virtually anything. This lead to high maintenance costs for the machines as well as inefficiencies when they were used. Enrico went back to the drawing board to invent anew. In 2007 he got a new patent for a system using an inorganic binding material and any old sand to 3D print buildings. The new process had low maintenance costs and was easier to use. Now Enrico can 3D print buildings, cost effectively.

He is now working on further improving the accuracy and will 3D print a full sized roundabout sculpture in Pisa Italy. The rendering below shows you the scale, once it has been installed. This is no pie in the sky stuff, it is happening now. The picture at the top of the post is of a quarter scale model of the actual 3D print of the roundabout.

Affable Enrico told me that his "small team is sitting on a huge opportunity." I would tend to agree. Their D_shape technology makes it possible to 3D print 6 by 6 by 1m parts. These parts could either be shipped to the construction site or the entire building could be 3D printed on location. The parts made by D_shape resemble 'sandstone.' They are comparable in strength to reinforced concrete and the ingredients are the binding material and any type of sand. D_Shape's materials cost more than regular concrete but much less manpower is needed for construction. No scaffolding needs to be constructed so overall building cost should be lower than traditional building methods.

The system works with a rigging that is suspended over the buildable part(you can see it at the top of the first image). The system deposits the sand and then the inorganic binding ink. No water is necessary. Because the two components meet outside the nozzle, the machine does not clog up and can keep up its accuracy of 25 DPI. Enrico and D_Shape are currently talking to lots of construction & engineering companies and architects about their technology.

The technology would seem to be especially interesting for these architects. With D-Shape they could make previously impossible forms and indeed approach a building not as a place where planes intersect but much more organically. As with regular 3D printing methods a lot of forms can only be made in this way. I for one would love to work in a Moebius strip office building.

One thing that I personally found very compelling about the technology is that it does not use cement. The production of cement creates a lot of CO2. The D-Shape process has the possibility to be much more environmentally friendly because the build material does not need to be made by heating limestone and so would create much less carbon dioxide. Since the build material is just sand plus the inorganic binder it could be much better for the planet too.

What is next for D_Shape? One group of people that Enrico is talking to is the group responsible for the still ongoing construction of Gaudi's Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. Perhaps the engineer that was so inspired by Gaudi could help finish his work using 3D printing.   

I was thrilled by the response to the Singer problem post so I've decided to once more share another one of my tortured analogies with you.

The Milk analogy

Milk is a huge business. A typical US consumer consumes 178 pounds of milk products a year and drinks 21 gallons of the milk. In 2007 in the US alone the dairy industry had revenues of $99,700,000,000. There are approximately 34,000 supermarkets in the US & 13,000 small grocery stores. In addition there are many other retail outlets that sell milk. Many of these milk retailers are well located and have long opening hours, while others compete on price. It is therefore easy to get milk in the United States.

There is however a huge business opportunity here. I will give you this business idea, completely free of charge and even get you started with the marketing of it. This business idea will turn the dairy industry and milk consumption on its head as well as revolutionize food retailing and have a lasting impact on society. Riches and fame await for the person that is lucky enough to read this and able to capitalize on this idea.

Major revolutions in retailing and consumer behavior typically often when distribution problems are solved in inventive ways. Milk distribution in the US seems to be an efficient affair with high barriers to entry that depend on scale and scope. That is until you apply real insight and inventiveness to the problem. To be "at arms length" at all times to the customer is the dream of any distributor and retailer in any industry. You can do this for the dairy industry by implementing this simple idea:

put a cow in every home.  

Consumers like milk and respond very well to "freshness", wholesome, healthy and immediacy. A cow in every home will allow these consumers to consume milk in the most healthy, fresh and immediate form. Furthermore, in the long run they will be able to drink this much fresher much healthier much more available milk at lower cost than store bought milk. The environmental benefits would be self evident. A cow could in addition to being a milk dispensing device also function as a household pet. The cuteness and docility of cows will drive widespread adoption.   

Your distribution channel will focus directly on the consumer and allow for high margins by cutting out the middle man. Furthermore by supplying the inputs for the cow such as hay and "superfood for your cow" you have a potential high margin secondary revenue stream similar to Proctor & Gamble's razorblades model. If you act quickly the "aftermarket" in cow accessories such as pens, toys and grooming equipment could be yours also.

Some of the skeptics will invariably see problems with this idea. They will say things like:

"81% of the united States is urbanized. In a city home there simply will not be any room for a cow. In suburban homes there might in some case be room but it will be difficult. Cows also produce a lot of waste, they stink and specialized training will be needed to care for them. It also takes a lot of work to take care of cows.The market will soon be saturated with other firms offering cows for sale even if it does work."

I will quickly repudiate any and all objections from these naysayers.

The genius of this plan is to create: mini-cows. Through genetic engineering you can create low cost, small footprint, low waste, low maintenance cows. This proprietary technology is patentable and will create barriers to entry. No one will be able to sell your excellent breed of cow at the same price point and with the same low footprint. The prime mover advantage in this industry will be enormous and while others struggle to catch up and genetically engineer similar cows you will be free to conquer and own the market.

As for the branding and marketing I have some suggestions. I would not go for the Holstein breed of cattle. Although iconic I would not consider this a wise choice. The black and white patterning will tend to breed tired visual and marketing as well as limit your brand. Tucows and Gateway (remember when they both were cool?) both have copyrights in the tech arena with the typical black & white patterning. A lot of dairy firms already use similar patterning in their respective fields. Instead I would suggest going for a Jerrsey, Brown Swiss Cow or Guernsey breed. These are all good milk producers, docile, smaller than Holsteins and have a distinctive look. This will make for easier patent and intellectual property development and protection. By taking a distinctive breed you can also dominate and define the "category" of the in home milk producers more easily.

As for the consumer marketing itself it would be simple. Focus on cuteness, utility and originality. I would also advocate for a social media viral marketing campaign.

Take the photograph below, tastefully insert your brand and URL somewhere and submit a link to the image on your site to services such as Reddit and Digg and you should be golden.

Please remember to attribute it to Law_keven correctly and realize it is a Share Alike Creative Commons license.

As you will have gathered this post is not about milk at all but about desktop 3D printers.

Fist some background for you, 3D printing in a nutshell:

A 3D printer today costs from $10,000-$900,000. When I use the term 3D printing I mean it in the broad sense as explained here. 3D printers are typically the size of coke machines. An experienced 3D modeler has to make a 3D file that is watertight, 2-manifold and with the normals pointing in the right direction. This 3D file has to be checked and often repaired. Then the machine software takes this file and calculates how the machine will make it. The support structures and orientation of the part have to be calculated also. Next, layer by layer material is built up into the resulting object. There is a manual process for removing support material (the brown stuff in the picture right) and many processes require additional steps such as curing or hardening in some way. The printer requires a skilled & experienced operator to be run efficiently.

Some machines can work in an office environment but the removing of support material is often not suited for an office. Other machines produce a lot of dust or work with toxic materials and I would not want them within a city block of my home. Price of the machines depend on build volume, build speed and the types of materials they can work with. These materials also vary widely in price. There is no clear "best" 3D printing technology or material, it all depends on the use case.

The Desktop 3D printing revolution will put small and easy to use versions of these machines in everyone's home. Inspired by this T-shirt however I have begun to doubt that this revolution will be as easy, quick or complete as promised.

As I work for Shapeways which is a 3D printing community which is based on giving access to the most expensive machines for the lowest prices through scale I must confess to definitely being biased and perhaps suffering from confirmation bias. I also realize that I am exposing myself to a Thomas Watson type of risk as expressed by this comment to the Singer post

But, with that in mind I do want stimulate discussion on desktop 3D printing and point out that the path to the mainstream will be a bit slower than anticipated. Furthermore, it will not be a case of "laser printers were expensive" now they are cheap, ergo the same will happen with desktop 3D printing. The drivers for the adoption of this technology will be different ones entirely.

Just because a lot of people like a technology, just because it could change anything and everything does not mean it will be implemented successfully. Good ideas do not win just because they are good ideas. The milk analogy, hopefully, illustrates barriers to profitability and implementation for a commercial company attempting to put a desktop printer on every desk, in every home. Even if the obvious technical challenges could be solved, instantly and right now, would mini-cows or desktop printers in every household work?

The reasons why mini-cows would or would not work depend on consumer behavior, consumer perception, the ability and willingness of someone to engage with a particular new technology and the usefulness of this technology to them at any given moment. A device's perceived and actual utility to a person making a decision to buy it, or not.      

The $5000 desktop 3D printer does not matter.

Its existence an sich will not magically make a market. If I created a $5000 consumer friendly desktop nuclear reactor tomorrow, would it sell? Regulatory issues aside and imagining that government bodies would certify it as safe. It would be mega high tech and interesting and would be sure to get a lot of techies blood flowing faster. The marketing launch would be immense. I'm sure that there would be people that wanted one. But, would a lot of people buy one? Would you? Why or why not?

To me the price point would not matter at all. The inventiveness and sheer possibility of it would not matter either. Even the fact that the thing would be an incredibly good investment for consumers would not matter. What would kill such an initiative ultimately would be that people are afraid of the word "nuclear."

The technology itself and the possibilities, although endless, would be immaterial.

As for the desktop 3D printer market: The real barriers to adoption by consumers should be similar to the ones expressed in the Singer post and the drivers for adoption would come from the materials and the ability of everyone to design, not the machine itself.

Oh look at that is that a collection 3D printed Stainless Steel and bronze infused Ringpoems? Perhaps we should get around to putting them in boxes?

To track the rapid manufacturing industry I read a lot of newsletters, have a lot of news alerts and RSS feeds set up and scan a lot of websites every day. I also read offline publications such as the Wohlers Report. If you do not have that kind of time but still want to know what is happening with 3D printing and the industry there are two great blogs doing that for you. These blogs that could do all your curating for you are Fabbaloo & Replicator. I read every post on both blogs to keep informed and make sure what I post here does not overlap with their posts. Check them out! Fabbaloo has some great stories such as this one about 3D printing a puck and this one about printing bones. Joseph Flaherty at Replicator has a great story here about different types of production technology and this inspiring one about 3D printing ceramics.   

Remember our Metal 3D printing in titanium contest? We finally are shipping Yanying's titanium 3D printed Spiral Cage today and wanted to share some photographs of her model. We hope that you enjoy your prize Yanying!

What do you guys think of the titanium model? I think that Yanying's design is beautiful as well as very illustrative of all the future possibilities in 3D printing.  

This jewel measures 2.6 by 2.5 by 4.9cm. It is made of titanium an this coupled with the process makes it rare and expensive. It costs about as much as an entry level MacBook. There is a lot of titanium in the world but very little 3D printed titanium. A lot of jewelery has already been made out of titanium so it should be a viable material. The process should add value since I would assume that rare=good in the jewelry business. I also personally believe that customized jewelery is a huge potential opportunity.

But..do you see yourself buying a 3D printed titanium jewel? Do you see yourself making your wedding ring on Shapeways? Or would you be more likely to buy/make a less expensive jewelery item?

In short: is there are market for high end custom made 3D printed jewelery? And is this market dependent on the material (ie titanium is good because it is a recognized jewelery material) or dependent on the process (ie I've always wanted to make something nice and affordable for my wife)?

I'm still amazed at the diversity of the things that you guys make. I've taken some examples of your work from the It Arrived thread in the forum. Gijs made prototype of a pill box for anti-conception pills. You can turn the ring and the pill for that day falls out. He also made a beautiful maze and painted it with a marker.

 

oopsclunkthud made a tuned intake for a scooter.

 

FrankBuss made a nice case and painted it metallic blue.

Lorddarthvik made a Piston Keychain.

And the winner of our Moving Part contest is....Jdavidbush with his excellent Roll Back Racer. He wins $300 in 3D printing and our applause. You can see the little car in action on the forum.

In second place is Frankbuss with his Balance Weighing Scale.

In third place is Whystler with his Orrerey. This by the way is a, "full functional model of the 4 terrestrial planets: mercury, venus, earth, and mars. Ideal for planning your next interplanetary voyage on your star-galleon, the planets can be moved to show their orbital placement around the sun."

Once again the contestants really raised the bar for 3D printing and what is possible with 3D printing. The other entrants to the contest were also all excellent and you should definitely check them out. Not a lot of moving 3D printed parts have ever been designed or made apart from basic hinges and things. And here we can see that a community of talented individuals can create wonderful things. We really think that this is the future and hope that through this contest everyone got a glimpse of that future.

Shapeways Community member Bscans(aka Peter van Lievenoogen), makes computers for electric bikes in his spare time. So what is an electric bike? 

V-Fiets, makes conversion kits to turn your bicycle into an electric bike. For 439 Euro's you can turn any regular bike into an electric bike that goes 25 KM per hour. It costs 18 cents to recharge the battery and you can travel for 40-60KM with that one charge. You can also alternate between cycling yourself and the electric motor.                                          

This is how the conversion process works, Peter has developed a bicycle computer for these kinds of bikes. The computer keeps track of battery usage, the distance you can travel with the battery, the temperature etc. He used Shapeways to make a prototype of his electric bike computer and will use that to cast the final versions in.

Peter built and programmed the entire thing from the ground up. He still has to make the PCB and then a final production version. His story got us really excited because we want to do a lot more with mechanical parts, housings and home built things that go to final production products.

He is also working on an awesome OLED screen for his EBC. Check out the video of it below.

I think the implications of this are gigantic. Someone can now, in the comfort of his own home create technology that does not exist yet. You can compete with Sony. For most things scale will make their products cheaper but for certain niches you can compete, right now. Today. Hopefully in due time services like Shapeways will be able to bring scale to your doorstep, to your living room.