81–90 of 112 posts
Does it strike you as odd that the guys who seem to be the "makers" are dead last on Carbon's about page? http://carbon3d.com/about/
I got to meet the software side of the Carbon3D team (and printer) not too long ago, and came away extremely impressed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Projectors and motors are analog devices. Even step motors do not move from one position to the other instantly. In theory you could tell the build plate to go up 100 microns and tell the projector to change the image while taking into account what happens between the two stages. While the motor moves and the lights change color. So you can create different kinds of continuous transitions between the stages. This app…
The image the projector makes is in theory also in frames of course. But yeah, discussion, is a movie continuous or is it frames p/s?
Other displays could vary! A display capable of incrementally updating the picture could show motion as a series of changes without there actually being a frame, just deltas... Done quickly, this would approximate what the human eye does.
In the context of this process, "frame" would refer to the changes to the projected image. Each of those changes would be a "frame"
But, if the object being rendered is actually in motion during the cure, there will be interpolation between those "frames", resulting in a very analog like product.
The motion would be "frames" too, as each micro-step would presumably be a controlled atomic thing, but those movements would not necessarily need to be keyed to the changes in the projected image.
Take both of those up in terms of rates and precision, and it's all going to blend together, particularly as both push the material to it's change rate limits.
Think "motion blur" when motion exceeds capture rates, or in the case of analog film, where reality "smears" onto the film while a shutter is open.
Does it strike you as odd that the guys who seem to be the "makers" are dead last on Carbon's about page? http://carbon3d.com/about/
It's not that engineers aren't important, but they shouldn't be running the company. It's not the skill they have cultivated. They do still probably have a significant equity stake, so all is not lost.
See the paper in Science released online just now: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2015/03/16/science.a... It will apparently be the cover story. (Does this count as Sequoia breaking Science's embargo?): https://twitter.com/sequoia/status/577651625545748480 From the abstract: "...feature resolution below 100 micrometers. ... complex solid parts can be drawn out of the resin at rates of hundreds of millimeters…
That's fascinating but a bit out of my depth. Do you have any references that a newbie to 3d printing should look at before taking the plunge?
I am just a bit sad that this is going to be a commercial venture protected by Intellectual Property. IP is the reason why filament extrusion is so widespread and cheap for DIYers compared to SLA.
http://www.3ders.org/articles/20120911-a-list-of-diy-high-re...
Is there some new IP here I'm missing?
These guys don't mess around. Their inventions do spin off into real companies with real products, and they have a track record to prove their success. Joe has been involved with projects as diverse as an environmentally-friendly dry cleaning technology [4] to nanocarriers for vaccines [5].
I was ready to write this off as another promising idea that would either never make it to market or experience serious issues with the quality and reliability of the polymers. Knowing now that DeSimone is behind this is all the reassurance I need. This will be a real product, it will make it to market, and it will produce quality 3D prints.
1: http://www.chem.unc.edu/people/faculty/desimone/index.html?d...
2: http://lemelson.mit.edu/winners/joseph-m-desimone
3: http://www.chem.unc.edu/people/faculty/samulski/index.html
This is still a layer-by-layer process: the DLP takes a 3D object and uses a 2D projection (in both the mathematical and physical sense) per layer. Due to pixel constraints, this process will produce objects with similar resolution, although may have more organic edges instead of harder ones. I’d bet the software stack being used still slices the object into layers, so the projector still operates in a layer-by-layer fashion, and likely well below the theoretical 60 or 120 layers / second max dictated by frame-rate. The key advantage here, and it’s a big one, is speed.
It's tremendously exciting to see companies tackling the speed problem in 3DP. In the next two years, we will see a 25x improvement on print speeds from companies like HP, Carbon3D, ...