@@PUREBOILINGRAGE55 Are you saying him shaking around little vials of crap and talking, like we saw here, is all he really had to display? I was of the impression we simply didn't get to see what everyone else saw, but your implication does make me rethink the entire situation. That would be the most logical reason not to show it, honestly. I think I side with you until actual evidence is shown.
open source also, damn man, i love these kids, y'all are doing great, way better than i ever could have imagined when i was there myself. Damn man, i'm just so happy for y'all. Great fucking work everyone.
@@Teeveepicksuresthat’s the hope… but I’ve been saying it and desperately hoping I’m right for 30 years… I figured the backwards politics in my state would fade as the old guard died… but they just keep making fresh ones… power is attractive as hell. I’d have never guessed you could find a young person that would be down with Mitch McConnell style… yet here we are and right wing media is going strong and being led by old but the young are taking up the mantle… Still hope you’re right
Couldn't find a link to a site, but found a different video interviewing this same guy that was *MUCH* more informative. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4JQq1m3cmOU.htmlsi=P-jx8g3nGShUlxXZ Shows off some actual parts printing and explains the whole process.
When doing computed tomography (the inverse of this) you have to back propagate a bunch of times to not accidentally fill in a concave void. Maybe they simulate a run and look for spots that got too much light and then turn it down later?
So..I'm not understanding whats going on; like the actual process. What specifically is doing the forming? And how does that happen, physically; what are the steps? In fact, what material(s) is that even?
Okay i can see them using this to print out the frames for large structures, with a big enough container. In space they may not even need the containers. Surface tension should be enough.
It's very strange that this is being done for the 1st time. The technology itself is quite obvious. In my lab we have done acoustic holographic techniques for some time.
You see that n you instantly think "goddamn thats gotta be crazy expensive. Well, I'll never get my hands on it." Then ol boy says "open source" n we all collectively shit our pants.
Now this is truly amazing from what we now know, this guy have a great spirit to it too, amazing, I'm hooked for more ! PS: BTW, time to make another season of WestWorld with a revamped intro XD
Video projector (UV light) onto uncured resin, after software converts a 3D model into a movie. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jcwYFBeetH0.htmlsi=-l-zc_bZfLP6ctok
UV image projector (no lasers needed.) Fast because it doesn't need to scan each point/voxel, it just needs a sequence of images from many directions, until the parts that need to be solid are "lit up" enough to harden. (It's the inverse of a CAT scan where you irradiate the whole volume and get measurements of the solidity, instead of causing it.)
I mean wouldn’t it be better just to take it up in a plane/helicopter/drone/weather balloon and drop it if you are dropping it anyway rather than looking for a really long exceptionally straight mineshaft?
To get 20 seconds of free fall you need a 1.2 mile mine shaft (and then you hit the bottom at 600+ mph, oops.) The vomit comet/Zero Gravity Corporation aircraft flights are... more practical :-)
Saw a video on this 4 years ago which means the technology existed long ago which means he didn't created, hence the open source comment. "Search for 3D light printing to check out video "
No! Not that simple. This would still be classical layer by layer. And its already being done. The approach is computer tomography in reverse. You shine a beam through the sample from ALL angles by rapidly rotating. Where the accumulated beam intensity crosses a threshold the resin solidifies. This is a computationally difficult task. There is uunique solution for this inversion problem and a lot of trade offs to consider.
instead of pulling up the print layer by layer you are just rotating it now -- what problem does this solve other than showing that the inversion math works???@@michaelrenper796
Can`t be done with laser proyectors? make 3D image from all angle. You can make skins object and after the usefull bolts and things. I dont see this aproch on 3D printing. That is why i like human to be free from comunism and starving. We can create lot of things. More minds to thinks more we can achive.
“Explain what the Vomit Commit is.” “Okay, it’s this very special plane that does parabolic arcs.” Not “It’s a specially-modified airliner that climbs then nose-dives for about 20 seconds at the speed of falling so people inside experience near-zero gravity- it’s how they get zero-gravity scenes for big-budget movies like Apollo 13, as well as being used for a lot science.” This guy is seriously something. If I were talking to him I’d ask what axis the parabolic arcs are in - left-right? - and once he clarified, ask if parabolic arcs have anything to do with micro-gravity, or if that’s just a side-effect of how pilots fly maneuvers and the stress of the plane. Then I’d try to get him further side-tracked on physics stresses on airplanes, further getting away from the subject and point of his 3D printing project.
That's the thing a lot of people completely get wrong, they think monopolization is a result of private actions and not public enforcement. The reason why things like Insulin are so expensive in the US is due to the IP law that prevents you from making a generic and instead you need to invest in a biosimilar product, go through all the testing, (which constitutes a tiny fraction of the direct cost) fines, fees, etc. and you can't buy it from Canada and import it either because that's illegal too. The literal only thing that makes FOSS special is that it's functionally the explicit concession of public IP protection that says "I do not have the right to claim public protections from someone else using this work against my will". (which is also why people like Rossman who lie about it are that much worse, licensing and trademark are two entirely different things and saying you can't make it actually FOSS because someone might misuse the trademark is just asinine to anyone who knows anything about software) I have immense respect for people who FOSS their shit, some respect for people who just "open-source" it, almost zero respect for people who don't do either, and negative 5000 respect for people who lie and misrepresent it for personal gain.
@@robonator2945I won't say Rossman is right about everything, but he's not lying, nor has he conflated copyright and trademark that I've seen. Given his work on right to repair *and* advocacy for open source I think it's reasonable to give him some leeway for misspeaking.
It's all open source, there are links and stuff.. And none of that is in the vid/description. Rly?... Even after not asking any key questions on how the tech works?....
This is amazing, and it’s specially designed to be used both with and without gravity, which makes it even more amazing. Imagine factories full of these printers, they’re small now but they should be able to have the same volume as a resin 3D printer.
FDM printers also operate fine without gravity however, so not necessarily the most amazing thing. What's more amazing to me is the nut he printed having threads on the inside. AFAIK, concave, internal surfaces are a challenge to do with this method.
@@PeppoMusic Internal surfaces I don't think should be a problem because that system kinda works kind of like how radiotherapy machines work. I think an MRI machine could be converted into one of these kinds of printers lmao
I tend to disagree. It's faster to print this, so there will be time savings there for intricate parts. I wonder about the environmental impact, though.
Can't print large parts due to heat issues. I think that an AI algorithm that takes into account all crazy influence could improve the prints substantially. Without that, the printing process would have to be iteratively refined by simulating it, comparing to the original, making adjustments etc. This simulation would have to be performed using a Monte Carlo light spread simulation, and take into account changing optical properties during curing, time and the influence of local temperature on cure rate. I don't think that would practically work. An AI that "intuitively" solves that problem may however work. Just look at protein folding AI or deblurring/ denoising AI.
Now we wait for this to inevitably be marketed by google or whoever and everyone forgets the existence of this bright young man and gives all credit to the first c suiter to snatch it up
That's the beauty of open source - it's still protected under copyright law, you can't go and make a copy of it or use parts of it that gets monetized, derivatives of the project always have to be open source as well - that's why for example Blender will never be monetized even if it wanted, and if you create your own fork of Blender it'll have to be free as well
@@nofabeNot quite. That's specifically how copyleft licenses like the GPL work, but not permissive licenses like MIT or BSD. If your project has a permissive license, it's still open source. More importantly, licenses like the GPL make use of *copyright* law, not patent law. That means they can't really protect hardware inventions such as this 3D printer.
Exactly!! WTF?!? “Here’s something really cool that we will tell you absolutely nothing about, and no way to find out more! Oh… And let’s add a blank 10 seconds to the end of the video too. “
search for "computed-axial-lithography" on the referenced open source site. (i have to phrase it like that because google removes links and specific phrases of mine for some reason.)
There was such project 10 years ago wich also succeeded in doing this. But the project got discontinued due to lack of funds. Yet the volume was around 350*350*350.
Instant printing in 20 seconds. We won't show you start to finish though. Just some vials with things you can't see well and some small parts that may or may not have been printed with this machine.
appears to be the same basic tech as those lasered cubes of glass you get at gift shops with little 3d objects made up of dots from a focused laser. just replace glass cube with vial of laser cured resin.
I was tripping on LSD when I came up with this idea. I saw massive 15m in dia cylindrical vials printing parts in orbit. So sick. Don’t do drugs kids they will steal all your ideas.
This is like a CT (Computed Tomography) scanner, but in reverse. Really neat. I didn't think it would be very reliable, due to having to shine the light through parts of the resin that you don't want to solidify, but it seems like they've cracked the formula.
I think they quite literally had to crack a formula. Im gonna try to fjnd their github later to read more about this, but my guess is that part of their work was finding the right UV resin formula that takes a certain amount of exoosure to start polymerization but once polymerization has started it doesnt take a lot of exposure to cure. That way you get away with shortly exposing resin that isnt supposed to be exposed to add exposure time to something behind it. I also guess that the jnitial parts are in a very uncured state where they are just solid enough to be cleanes and then put in a UV camber to fully cure them.
@@nicholasweiss4662 Yeah, a non-linear curing time thing. That was probably the toughest part. Looks like they are probably using DLP dev kits with UV LEDs, too. Must have been hard to focus the light through the cylinders properly.
My first guess would have been that they use multiple beams that are individually not powerful enough to cure all that quickly, but where the beams converge, it is more than enough intensity at that location. That comes to mind because of both the speed and the ability to do multiple parts floating in a single vial. Still gives me the impression that you'd get partial curing or increased viscosity throughout the rest of the vial, which would make any remaining resin waste. If that is the case, scaling this up to larger print volumes will be hard.
Video projector (UV light) onto uncured resin, after software converts a 3D model into a movie. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jcwYFBeetH0.htmlsi=-l-zc_bZfLP6ctok
@@cmendoza1094regular lasers that actually exist are just fine. What's being done is all in the name. The needed attenuation and focus is calculated ahead of time and it works like any other UV printer except that the focus and energy are finely calculated to cure voxels from the inside out rather than raising a build plate. You can see all of this in the video. There are problems of course, loss of precision is an obvious one.
If you search for "hayden computerized axial lithography" you'll find his page at Berkeley which has a nice animation - it's basically a UV projector that projects a sequence of images into a rotating resin vial. Any one image doesn't put enough energy in to fully cure a "spot", but they add up as it goes around to produce a (floating) solid.
I've been working with this printing tech since 1979. It's resin that cures in various light wavelengths, and it relies on focal points or intersections of differing wavelengths. Red and blue intersections produce uv. Infra red relies on focal point heating. The newest printers use uv focal points. Project bluebeam is similar inasmuch as when two beams intersect, plasma in the visible wavelengths is produced. As of now bluebeam can only spoof stellar navigation by imposing the wrong constellations onto the sky. Sorry folks, we can't make convincing ufos or dieties yet.
I've see a few videos w this process. Not one shows it actually printing. As far as the zero g printing instead of removing gravity why not just match density of fluid and part it should just hang out in the fluid until disturbed. Right now it's much cheaper to modify viscosity of a fluid as opposed to modifying gravity. Lol. I dont understand why they are going thru all this to make a jellylike consistency substance into something more like resin printer epoxy. Maybe it's really hard to seperate the uncured resin from the product? Just a guess, I can't find it talked about anywhere.
So no need for supports and it prints really fast? If someone could make this high def enough and affordable for mass consumption this will be a game changer.
@@redone823 sure. True. But even first printers 3DSYS made were able to produce a useable part. This method is not constrained. And by the physics cannot be at this scale. But we’ll see
Investment casting turns almost anything into a cast: Aluminum, steel, bronze, or other metal parts. Using a low melting point metal that melts in boiling water, such as Cerrosafe allows anyone to do it, even using 3D-printed or many other plastic molds.
