It seems that these do not provide an actual deliverable that architects can use or get paid for beyond models or small prototypes. So are these machines gateways to bigger things or who do architects make good use of them?
This kind of decision really depends on what you plan to use it for, how much money you want to commit, and how steep of a learning curve you're willing to tackle.
I am deciding if this is a direction we need to go into as part of our practice. Right now I have a hard time understanding how it either complements our work or process, or if its just not relevant beyond academic work.
its as relevant as what you think of physical models you build. Some people see little use in and rarely build models when they design, while others know the value in it and never start a design project without it.
I just got done writing a business case for purchase and implementation of 3D printing/prototyping technology for my firm. I looked at CNC fabricators/cutters, extrusion/fusion printers, laser cutters, stereolithography machines, foam cutters, and a bunch of other stuff. We're a larger firm with offices all over the world and fairly significant R&D budget, so the conclusions we reached might not be the same as those applicable to a smaller firm. YMMV, IANAL, FYI, WTF, GTFO, etc.
We have been looking at technologies that can help us rapidly protoype multiple design iterations for physical study from early in planning and concept design in a fluid, time-sensitive, collaborative process. We also want the tools to let us prototype components, and ultimately want the capability to do large- and full-scale mock-ups for critical areas.
Laser cutters have the lowest total cost to implement, but the least flexibility for output. You can get a decent laser cutter in a large enough format to be useful for anywhere between $8,000 to $12,000. Although that's quite a bit more than a Form1 or Replicator, it's operation, material usage, and flat learning curve make up for that in low operational costs.
Fusion/extrusion printers, such as the Makerbot Replicator 2X, have a low first cost (around $3,000). However, they are limited in output size, have a steeper learning curve, lack a bit in finish quality at the lower end, and require very expensive materials (approx. $100 per cubic inch printed). Back on the plus side, you can use one of these to make a whole bunch of alternative massing models with complex shapes and internal voids at small scale if you don't mind burning through a whole lot of expensive plastic and spending several days doing it (they print very slowly).
CNC routers like the Shopbot are more expensive for first cost than either of the former (around $15,000 plus), but have the most flexibility, expandability, speed, and relatively low operating costs. With a spindle, they can cut all but the hardest materials (metal/ceramic). For 2.5D output, the learning curve is relatively flat. Full 3D requires the purchase of a rotary indexer and additional specialist software (effectively doubling the capital cost).
I'd say that the usefulness of a 3d printer largely depends on how much you're willing to embrace changes in your workflow to use it.
I've worked with firms where the principals have a highly iterative and testing-based workflow, with few preconceived notions of what something should or shouldn't be, or should or shouldn't look like. A 3d printer would be great for a firm like this, where testing and iteration are the norm.
I've also worked for firms where the principals are quite rigid about what they think works or looks good, and are not interested in deviating from that, even if something else performs better. They're just not interested in anything beyond their rigidly held ideas. A 3d printer would be no use here.
So ask yourself if you're (or your firm is) the kind of environment that thrives on quick testing and iteration. If yes, then it's great for you. If not, it'll sit in a corner and catch dust.
On a recent competition I worked on, I tried to test many different sunshade shapes and configurations (using grasshopper + renders) but would have loved to 3d print and test the sunshading potential of different configurations.
we have Makerbot, it sucks big time :) good thing we have SLA printer too! FDM printers without support material have issues, those that have support material are better but have other issues, at the end of the day seams much more feasible to get commercial printer rather then a toy for home.
are they 3d printed or cnc routed? shop-bot is mostly focused on routing which is more stable technology. I can do jewelry on our CNC but i can not do the same on Makerbot, on another hand Polyget beats CNC
routed. there are all kinds of applications for cnc routing in construction... which i think is pretty obvious. I didn't realize they even did 3dpringing, which was perhaps my confusion with the overall topic.
Shopbot vs Makerbot: Who has one, who wants one, and why
It seems that these do not provide an actual deliverable that architects can use or get paid for beyond models or small prototypes. So are these machines gateways to bigger things or who do architects make good use of them?
form1 or b9 yo
This kind of decision really depends on what you plan to use it for, how much money you want to commit, and how steep of a learning curve you're willing to tackle.
I am deciding if this is a direction we need to go into as part of our practice. Right now I have a hard time understanding how it either complements our work or process, or if its just not relevant beyond academic work.
its as relevant as what you think of physical models you build. Some people see little use in and rarely build models when they design, while others know the value in it and never start a design project without it.
Maestro,
I just got done writing a business case for purchase and implementation of 3D printing/prototyping technology for my firm. I looked at CNC fabricators/cutters, extrusion/fusion printers, laser cutters, stereolithography machines, foam cutters, and a bunch of other stuff. We're a larger firm with offices all over the world and fairly significant R&D budget, so the conclusions we reached might not be the same as those applicable to a smaller firm. YMMV, IANAL, FYI, WTF, GTFO, etc.
We have been looking at technologies that can help us rapidly protoype multiple design iterations for physical study from early in planning and concept design in a fluid, time-sensitive, collaborative process. We also want the tools to let us prototype components, and ultimately want the capability to do large- and full-scale mock-ups for critical areas.
Laser cutters have the lowest total cost to implement, but the least flexibility for output. You can get a decent laser cutter in a large enough format to be useful for anywhere between $8,000 to $12,000. Although that's quite a bit more than a Form1 or Replicator, it's operation, material usage, and flat learning curve make up for that in low operational costs.
Fusion/extrusion printers, such as the Makerbot Replicator 2X, have a low first cost (around $3,000). However, they are limited in output size, have a steeper learning curve, lack a bit in finish quality at the lower end, and require very expensive materials (approx. $100 per cubic inch printed). Back on the plus side, you can use one of these to make a whole bunch of alternative massing models with complex shapes and internal voids at small scale if you don't mind burning through a whole lot of expensive plastic and spending several days doing it (they print very slowly).
CNC routers like the Shopbot are more expensive for first cost than either of the former (around $15,000 plus), but have the most flexibility, expandability, speed, and relatively low operating costs. With a spindle, they can cut all but the hardest materials (metal/ceramic). For 2.5D output, the learning curve is relatively flat. Full 3D requires the purchase of a rotary indexer and additional specialist software (effectively doubling the capital cost).
I'd say that the usefulness of a 3d printer largely depends on how much you're willing to embrace changes in your workflow to use it.
I've worked with firms where the principals have a highly iterative and testing-based workflow, with few preconceived notions of what something should or shouldn't be, or should or shouldn't look like. A 3d printer would be great for a firm like this, where testing and iteration are the norm.
I've also worked for firms where the principals are quite rigid about what they think works or looks good, and are not interested in deviating from that, even if something else performs better. They're just not interested in anything beyond their rigidly held ideas. A 3d printer would be no use here.
So ask yourself if you're (or your firm is) the kind of environment that thrives on quick testing and iteration. If yes, then it's great for you. If not, it'll sit in a corner and catch dust.
On a recent competition I worked on, I tried to test many different sunshade shapes and configurations (using grasshopper + renders) but would have loved to 3d print and test the sunshading potential of different configurations.
we have Makerbot, it sucks big time :) good thing we have SLA printer too! FDM printers without support material have issues, those that have support material are better but have other issues, at the end of the day seams much more feasible to get commercial printer rather then a toy for home.
I know several small firms/groups that do interior design and instillations with nothing but a shop-bot.
are they 3d printed or cnc routed? shop-bot is mostly focused on routing which is more stable technology. I can do jewelry on our CNC but i can not do the same on Makerbot, on another hand Polyget beats CNC
routed. there are all kinds of applications for cnc routing in construction... which i think is pretty obvious. I didn't realize they even did 3dpringing, which was perhaps my confusion with the overall topic.
i was thinking topic is about 3d printing. Routing is very old technology, i think it was there for ever, definitely before USA was even formed :)
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.