Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

carbon3d.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 112 posts

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#91

Post by chrisbennet »

exelius wrote: post #84
chrisbennet wrote: post #69

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/

Not at all. Carbon is a company; and building a company is just as difficult as building a technology (though a totally different skill set). 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.

I don't disagree that engineers bring a different skill set to the mix. The last thing you might want is engineers or scientists running a young company - though Microsoft, Google, Facebook, HP, Honda, Fairchild, Porsche, etc. turned out OK. ;-)

I just find it odd that Dr. Alex Ermoshkin the co-founder is listed somewhere after "Head of Customer Engagement" for example.

I just noticed that they are listed under the heading "North Carolina Office" and not "Leadership Team" so perhaps it is a simple as academics wanting to stay in academia.

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#92

Post by chrisbennet »

tdaltonc wrote: post #81
chrisbennet wrote: post #69

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/

Depending on how they're handling the "tech transfer", they might not actually have much to do with the company. A lot of academics prefer to keep being academics and just collect their royalty checks.

Yes, that would make sense. The 2 "makers" are listed under "North Carolina Office" and seem to be academics.

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#93

Post by [deleted] »

chrisbennet wrote: post #91
exelius wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. Carbon is a company; and building a company is just as difficult as building a technology (though a totally different skill set). 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.

I don't disagree that engineers bring a different skill set to the mix. The last thing you might want is engineers or scientists running a young company - though Microsoft, Google, Facebook, HP, Honda, Fairchild, Porsche, etc. turned out OK. ;-) I just find it odd that Dr. Alex Ermoshkin the co-founder is listed somewhere after "Head of Customer Engagement" for example. I just noticed that they are listed under the h…

[deleted]

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#94

Post by exelius »

chrisbennet wrote: post #91
exelius wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. Carbon is a company; and building a company is just as difficult as building a technology (though a totally different skill set). 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.

I don't disagree that engineers bring a different skill set to the mix. The last thing you might want is engineers or scientists running a young company - though Microsoft, Google, Facebook, HP, Honda, Fairchild, Porsche, etc. turned out OK. ;-) I just find it odd that Dr. Alex Ermoshkin the co-founder is listed somewhere after "Head of Customer Engagement" for example. I just noticed that they are listed under the h…

Yeah, that's what I would guess. Many academics simply have no interest in running a business (often because they've tried and found that engineering is more fun).

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#95

Post by [deleted] »

chrisbennet wrote: post #91
exelius wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. Carbon is a company; and building a company is just as difficult as building a technology (though a totally different skill set). 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.

I don't disagree that engineers bring a different skill set to the mix. The last thing you might want is engineers or scientists running a young company - though Microsoft, Google, Facebook, HP, Honda, Fairchild, Porsche, etc. turned out OK. ;-) I just find it odd that Dr. Alex Ermoshkin the co-founder is listed somewhere after "Head of Customer Engagement" for example. I just noticed that they are listed under the h…

[deleted]

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#96

Post by crocowhile »

joezydeco wrote: post #88
crocowhile wrote: post #48

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.

I'm confused. There are lots of people doing this type of 3D printing using video projectors and whatnot. http://www.3ders.org/articles/20120911-a-list-of-diy-high-re... Is there some new IP here I'm missing?

you can certainly do it as DIYer but to ameliorate it and commercialize it you are going to deal with patenting. SLA patents just recently started to expire and this has already created an explosion of new developments. see here for instance http://qz.com/106483/3d-printing-will-explode-in-2014-thanks...

you may also want to check to formlabs last year, and their litigation on the patenting.

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#97

Post by samch »

tbenst wrote: post #90

One thing to clarify is that this is appears to be an insightful tweak on a popular form of 3D printing, rather than a new technology all together. This uses a standard vat photopolymerization process with a DLP projector. The key difference is the oxygen permeable window that removes the detachment step between layers. This step is a common point of failure and slowness with current inverted photopolymerization prin…

Yes, it does still slice into layers. Those layers were demonstrated in their paper as small as 1µm in thickness.

From the paper:

"Because CLIP is continuous, the refresh rate of projected images can be increased without altering print speed, ultimately allowing for smooth 3D objects with no model slicing artifacts."

"elevated at print speeds of 500 mm/hour"

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#98

Post by crocowhile »

gavazzy wrote: post #63
crocowhile wrote: post #48

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.

If it weren't for patents, they likely wouldn't have spent $40million developing it. Someone would reverse engineer it and then launch a Kickstarter and sell it without having to spend the R&D cost.

They did not spend $40M to develop it. The development came from tax-payer money given to their lab at UNC through classical funding streams.

Sequoia put in $40M to make a business out of it, which is a very different goal.

Re: Carbon3D – 3D Printing via Continuous Liquid Interface Production

#99

Post by fixermark »

jeffchuber wrote: post #18

so this is SLA+? speed seems to be a factor - i think SLA printers are limited by resin curing time under UV light. perhaps this is more a resin technology than a printer technology. they do keep mentioning oxygen - but it's not clear why

The oxygen enters the chamber from the permeable membrane that makes up the tank base, and creates a liquid-polymer barrier between the solidifying elements and the bottom of the tank. This means that the work doesn't fuse to the tank bottom, and can therefore be built not in a layered(1) fashion, but continuously. Therefore, both faster and (hypothetically) smoother.

(1) I'm sure there will still be some directional effects in the result---the light is only coming from one direction, for example. But you definitely shouldn't expect to see the "sandwich stacks" effect you get from extrusion-filament 3D printing.

Post reply on HN