RE: a prior message about 3D printing

From: Karl R. Denton (
Date: Tue Jul 15 1997 - 01:06:05 EEST

To all,

Sorry about the grammer in my last email, it was a reply done over a fast lunch! Please, oh please forgive me!


From: George Sachs[]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 1997 12:20 PM
Subject: RE: a prior message about 3D printing

NOTE: this is not intended to be personal and I have noticed it in lots of
Email of late.

Is it too much to ask of us Engineers, Researchers, Consultants, or other
PROFESSIONALS, that when we forward messages to this list they are at least
somewhat in keeping with grammatically correct English! Without being too
picky, the following <snips> have so many errors as to be beyond sloppy and
moving into the category of (I don't give a ...). Not having a grammar/spell
checker is no excuse either, since we were supposed to have learned these
basics in High School (I use an old fashioned dictionary too). I also find
it odd sometimes, that many of our members from other countries have a much
better command of the English language than many of us here in the States.
If it's worth posting, please take some extra seconds and proof read it.
Everyone makes mistakes and misspells when they are in a hurry, but when a
paragraph has so many errors as to be almost illegible, it not only doesn't
communicate well, it doesn't serve to make a good impression about the
author or their country of origin either. I don't use a spell checker or
calculator for routine things precisely because I don't want to forget
everything I learned in K-12 (By the way, I never got better than a B in
English class, so I'm no English major!).

Wishing you all good words,

George Sachs

At 07:59 AM 7/14/97 -0400, you wrote:
>YES to all of the items that you mention, however...the models that have
been produced on the concpt moderel were either so small it gave no
indication of hor the part would acutally be or the model(s) would build bad
and start delaminating on completion. We use one of our "real" rp machines
to produce full scale verifaction models that IF prove to be correct will be
investment cast. There is no possible way that this can be done with the
"concept" modeler.
>Your last comment "The most important is that these models must be ready
within say a coffee break" NOT onece did the concept modeler finish a part
by the time we had a coffee break! In fact it, even the designers that have
used the equipment have complained about the length of time it taks to build
even a small model! You seem to forget some of my previous comments: The
designers (the guys and gals that you clame need such a device) have stopped
using this equipment on their own. Thay have four that it is more usefull
to wait untill they get a design close enough and have us build a full size
model to review. One of the problems being that the modeler was so rough
that it would drop features smaller then a given size, not good.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:39:51 EEST