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 Heverleetel: +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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:47:39 EEST