HP Unveils Industrial 3D Printer 10X Faster, 50% Cheaper Than Current Systems 111
Lucas123 writes HP today announced an 3D industrial printer that it said will be half the cost of current additive manufacturing systems while also 10 times faster, enabling production parts to be built. The company also announced Sprout, a new immersive computing platform that combines a 23-in touch screen monitor and horizontal capacitive touch mat with a scanner, depth sensor, hi-res camera, and projector in a single desktop device. HP's Multi Jet Fusion printer will be offered to beta customers early next year and is expected to be generally available in 2016. The machine uses a print bar with 30,000 nozzles spraying 350 million drops a second of thermoplastic or other materials onto a print platform. The Multi Jet Fusion printer uses fused deposition modeling, an additive manufacturing technology first invented in 1990. the printer works by first laying down a layer of powder material across a build area. Then a fusing agent is selectively applied with the page-wide print bar. Then the same print bar applies a detailing agent at the parts edge to give high definition. The material is then exposed to an energy source that fuses it.
Since this is an HP product, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Since this is an HP product, (Score:5, Insightful)
And when you need more printing medium it's cheaper to just buy an entirely new printer rather than a new cartridge.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And the printer will be deliberately crippled so it can't print another printer.
Re: (Score:3)
Why not? The printer is a loss leader, what's making money is the ink.
Re: (Score:3)
And the printer will be deliberately crippled so it can't print another printer.
Why not? The printer is a loss leader, what's making money is the ink.
Stopping the printer from printing itself is an anti-Skynet precaution.
Re: (Score:2)
How is Skynet effectively different from any other contemporary corporation? Just 'cause there's no human on top that could benefit from rubbing out the others?
Re: (Score:2)
You say that like it's a good thing.
Re: (Score:1)
And, in case of mistake, it will only cancel your printing after it print all the undeletable queue.
Re: (Score:1)
Psst... That's a Windows problem. Doesn't happen on Mac. Cancel a job, and everything stops right away.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Since this is an HP product, (Score:5, Insightful)
the thermoplastic "ink" will be the most expensive substance on Earth, by weight or volume. And protected by a DRM'd cartridge system. And declare itself "empty" at about 25% remaining, in order to "protect the printer from running dry".
You also left out that the "ink" levels will slowly decrease over time if printer is not used.
And that if you are out of one "color" you still won't be able to print anything at all - even if you don't need to use that "color"
Re: (Score:1)
"LOL", you are so "funny".
Scanner Ink (Score:2)
My Epson ran out of scanner ink, couldn't scan anything until I bought more cartridges.
Re:Since this is an HP product, (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget the clogging and drying up if you don't use the printer for a while, requiring buying new ink cartridges, or a whole new printer.
Re: (Score:2)
or neededing color ink to print black even when it has a black cartridge.
or needed ink or needing to tape cartridges just to scan.
Re: (Score:2)
at least the printer driver doesn't erase your document and corrupt your Windows install when it happens...
there's always a bright side!
Re: (Score:2)
Where will decent software come from? (Score:5, Interesting)
Eh, I think the weakspot in any 3d printing will be the software. As a hobby engineer, I use Solidworks which is several thousand dollars (luckily already on some of my employer's computers so they foot the bill).
But at home, I tried FreeCad, Cubify Invent, and several other free or cheap options and I find them invariably terrible, at least as far my limited experience can discern. FreeCad in particular, asides from UI nonintuitive issues and heaps of bugs (various cuts and operations simply disappearing for no reason), is only up to v0.14 since launching in 2002. It's like the Gnu Hurd of that genre.
I don't see how the 3D printing revolution will remotely come to town without something decent on the software front that's $200 or less.
*Posted this yesterday in a thread, but was too late for anyone to see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps one of the established players will decide to bow out of the high-end, and target 3d printing. Or, make a new cut-rate home/small business version, ala Photoshop Elements.
On the open-source side we'll have to see if things turn out more like Gimp or Blender (usable options), or more like the video editing situation
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'd like to see an UnrealEd-style interface for one of these 3D modeling programs.
I've tried Maya, AutoCAD, and a couple of others, and I've not found a more intuitive interface than UnrealEd.
Not the visual part, that's just a standard top/side/front/render quad. I'm talking about the mouse control. Click to drag. Right-click to pan/roll. Chord-click to zoom. It was nearly as intuitive as, well, playing an FPS.
That, and the simplicity of brushes, but without the incomplete feature-set of UEd. Basically, cre
Re: (Score:2)
try Caligari trueSpace 3D (Score:2)
Caligari trueSpace 3D which as a long history is really nice.
Re: (Score:2)
Truespace is a very acessible 3D program. I loved the simplicity of its binary object tools. You might not make the most efficient model in TS, but its solid.
Re:Where will decent software come from? (Score:4, Interesting)
CAD is recognized by the FSF as an area with a lack of suitable Freely-licensed software.
Really? What is wrong with FreeCAD [freecadweb.org]? It is a full parametric 3D modeling system. It can be scripted in Python. It exports industry standard STL. I find it far easier to use than AutoCAD, SolidWorks, or any other CAD program I have used. I have used it for dozens of projects, and have run into no limitations. I have also used it with a 3D printing class at an elementary school for 4th, 5th, and 6th graders. They also had no problems with it. The license is GPL.
Re:Where will decent software come from? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well... I just got FreeCAD running last night. Been using QCad for several years and recently started OpenSCAD for some 3D modeling. So you want a new FreeCAD user's prospective?
I have spent the last 4 nights, 3-4 hours each night, trying to build and install all the dependancies for FreeCAD v0.14 on a CentOS 6.5 box. It was an absolute nightmare. The build documentation is crap and lists multiple things as requirements that have changed to something else (i.e. PyQt4 -> PySide), dependancies claimed to be optional but are infact manditory (i.e. GtWebkit [or, as I did, get fed up and rip out the code... why in the hell do I need a download models option in the open menu? Why is git/svn/etc. demanded in an end-user executable?]), hardcoded -python2.7 version dependancies. This comes after all the mess of compiling half-a-dozen different 3D libriaries each with their own compiling problems.
The first thing after finally getting it open.... the interface is a mish-mash of a dozen different modules with no indications of what to really use... The user has to go and learn every single one, then try to figure out what to use. Examples were installed... but who the hell knows where, there are no example libraries in the menu structure. And python? Why would a end-user want to learn Python just to create an object?
So I try to open a pretty basic STL I made earlier in OpenSCAD (disc with some bolt holes and a flange).... it takes 60+sec to import the STL object, but atleast it looks right. Kind of have the construction tree for the object in panel, but no obvious way to edit the code. I move it a bit, rotate the object around... and then suddenly its gone with a stream of "array[-1]" errors in console... Not a good way to start.
Re: (Score:2)
I have spent the last 4 nights, 3-4 hours each night, trying to build and install all the dependancies for FreeCAD v0.14 on a CentOS 6.5 box.
I had no problems at all installing on Ubuntu. At the school we installed onto several old Macbooks, and had no problems there either.
The build documentation is crap
Well, duh. It is open source, so of course the documentation will be crap.
And python? Why would a end-user want to learn Python just to create an object?
You don't have to use Python. It is just an option if you want to write macros or script repetitive tasks. All serious CAD programs have some sort of scripting, and using Python is much better than using some quirky, buggy, customized hack like AutoLISP.
Where will decent software come from? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how the 3D printing revolution will remotely come to town without something decent on the software front that's $200 or less.
Patience... Remember when 20 meg hard drives cost 2000 dollars? Besides the high prices are necessary for keeping a very high bar of entry. There are many disincentives to allowing these things on everybody's kitchen counter top.
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly, I never was able to afford any hard drive less than 20MB. They were cheap enough that I could get one.
Re:Where will decent software come from? Here's 4 (Score:5, Informative)
I'm also a Solidworks user. I think you overlooked a few.
GeoMagic Design Elements US$1300.
McNeel Rhino US$ 995
Cubify Design US$ 199
Cubify Invent US$ 49
I used a trial of GeoMagic Design, and almost purchased it. I think it was Alibre Design, so it somewhat of a Solidworks clone, and is far better than I expected. But my clients use Solidworks, so.....
I also use Rhino, and it does stuff Solidworks can only dream of. It lack full parametrics and a history tree, but has fantastic surface modeling. If you do complex surfaces, this is the one to get.
Cubify Design and Invent - have not tried them, but they likely fit what most people want to do - make simple parts.
Disclosure: I have been a customer for each of these companies, and know people at all three. I used to be a dealer for Solidworks and Rhino 14 years ago, and wish I didn't have to pay full retail today.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Blender, my friend, now has great sculpting tools akin Zbrush and many less travelled options to export for CAM. It is free and supported by a great community.
I used CAD tools as a pro, 10 years ago. I used NX, solidworks, edge, ProE WF, Autocrap, etc. I coded parametric designs from my own designs, I did non-linear hypersonic CFD with fluent and CFX on those designs, I did reverse-kinematic non-linear space robotics on those designs, I did it all.
When I stopped caring about empirical tons of hors
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't afford Solidworks. I keep dreaming of having the money but I can buy a lot of real equipment for that price. So I've used free 2d cad and Blender for printer modeling. Recently I've been using the nightly builds of Freecad. The UI is a freaking mess as you have already mentioned however the functionality is finally breaking the barrier of usability in the upcoming 0.15 release. The bugs that you mention are appearing less and less, and at least the backend is becoming more stable.
I did a sin
Re: (Score:1)
Cheep softare is written for the hobbyist, but that isn't a very large market. As more people buy 3D printers, they'll need software.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course even really good free/cheap CAD does not make everyone a CAD designer or whatever. 3D printers at home will do what most printers do at home. Print clip art (other peoples models) or photos (3d scan).
Printer will be half the cost... (Score:2)
The media will be 10x the cost of unbranded spools.
Re: (Score:3)
Would you prefer that they completely shut down their conventional printer business to focus on...
Hell yeah!
Sorry, did you say anything after that?
The 3D printing future is vastly underestimated (Score:3, Insightful)
The future of 3D printing is so big I can't even begin to mention it so most would understand it, but I'll give it a go:
1) Instant repair parts anywhere in the world on demand.
2) This is the beginning of teleportation!
3) Instant surgical body parts to anywhere in the world on demand.
4) Toys can be bought online, printed almost the same day, you'll pay for the consumables + design.
5) Businesses will be able to personalize your phones/ipads almost instantly.
6) We will build entire houses with this stuff.
7) We will even be able to bring parts to the moon/mars/outer-space without bringing them physically by spaceship.
8) We will even be able to print food, make the textures very similar by scanning eg. meat etc.
9) People! This is the beginning stages of the real replicator you all know from fictional stories as star-trek etc.
10) Insert your own idea / wish here, I can't be the only one.
I will encourage ANY company to do this, small or big. This can only go too slow, if you ever wanted to get in on a revolution in the making, THIS IS IT!
Re: (Score:3)
It's like the space age, people assumed getting into space (at all) was the hard part, but no, just getting people into space didn't change daily life at all, and getting to the next solar system is thousands of times harder.
Re: (Score:2)
This process can't happen fast enough, we need faster 3D printers, cost effective, better materials, more materials, better printing processes, less cleanup needed etc. And someone in here mentioned that the weak point is software...well...he's sort of partially right about that. There is a pretty hefty model-design cleanup on a polygonal level needed to print properly, and you can't just design stuff out of the blue - you must have some knowledge on modelling FOR 3D printing as the leg
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
2) Bull. Not teleportation. Anymore than magnetism is antigravity.
3) Not instant, but otherwise true.
4) A little bit true.
5) Not likely
6) already building houses out of it. But won't - too expensive
7) Totally true. Space applications are great.
8) printing food is a silly idea.
9) Replicators are hundreds, if not thousands years in the future. This is not the beginning, anymore than the printing press was the begining of the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it's more likely that people will bring their phasers, and I wouldn't rely on them switching it to stun...
Re: (Score:2)
That's why all self respecting rebels in the future use disruptors instead of phasers.
Re: (Score:3)
Fuck that newfangled artsy-shmartsy technology, where's my old .45?
Re: (Score:2)
What's vastly underestimated is the impact it will have on some industries and how we'll get to see some design-patent battles that will make the whole copyright battles the various content owners are pushing look like petty bickering.
A lot of money is made today in a second market, in spare parts. And here especially in the automobile area. And here, more and more parts are made of plastic. Why? Because, unlike metal, you can't really fix failing plastic parts. You have to buy them again. Now ponder for a
Re: (Score:2)
Did you really just describe Govrnment Motors as a company that doesn't depend on the government to protect their failed business model? Their business actually failed, but the corruption was high enough that the government just threw money at them.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, Government Motors is a pension plan with a car making problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Most little fiddly metal parts were long made of pot metal anyway. You could maybe TIG them if you had all the pieces and they were in the right size range, or braze them back together. But you're right, it's offensive how much these plastic parts cost. If you have one good one, or can get the original back into intact condition with glue, you can sometimes mold a replacement. Some of the resins available are pretty fancy now.
Re: (Score:2)
Physical printer size needs to be larger .... (Score:2)
I was just talking about this earlier today with a friend of mine. I think what will really make 3D printing take off is the availability of commercial printers that are room-sized devices, capable of printing off large pieces.
With the 3D printers confined to, essentially, the same dimensions as typical all-in-one fax/printer/scanners or desktop lasers, they're only capable of printing very small objects. That's a great place to start, as this is a new technology ... and people need to learn the basics of h
Re: (Score:2)
3D printing will remain one of the most expensive ways to fabricate things for a long time. For anything mass-produced (like most toys) it will be much less expensive to have them injection-molded and sold in stores.
The real interesting thing is the ability to produce parts fast and cheap enough in quantities of one. Instant repair parts are a possibility, for machines and people.
We won't in general be printing toys or building houses that way (although people have done some work on printing houses).
Re: (Score:2)
And then there are electronics and all the different materials you would need. It won't be quite the revolution you think it will be. It is not like they are new or anything.
Great Source! (Score:5, Insightful)
My favorite part of the article is the fact that it appears to be written by HP given the file:// link in the article.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, not that cheap (Score:2)
I misread the article and thought the printer and Sprout were the same thing, and under $2000. I was excited but I'm sad now.
is this "spinoff" HP or "other" HP?? (Score:2)
I get so confused as to what HP really is these days. is it Agilent, or soon-to-be-divested, or big iron and big-cost software with a small user base ???
Re: (Score:2)
As always the description is wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
The printer does not spray "drops of thermoplastic," it sprays magic chemicals that either inhibit or promote sintering onto a bed of thermoplastic powder and then uses a big o' incandescent bulb to fuse the powder. This is pretty much the selective inhibition of sintering process, so the magic chemicals are probably just something like salt water and black ink.
Now what does this mean? Well because you have to spray a sintering inhibitor on, you can't recycle as much powder, unless they give you a special powder recycler for removing the inhibitor. Because you're printing out lots of black ink, can't really recycle powder, and HP will lock you into using their cartridges you will be paying out the a$$ for ink and 'toner.'
This is a HUGE development though. If the parts really have the same strength and detailing as those produced with laser sintering, as in even if this machine did not come equipped with color capability, then this has just made a lot of big industrial 3d printers obsolete. Getting rid of the need for laser and nitrogen gas purge system for sintering type machines is HUGE! Even with huge expensive print cartridges it's going to be cost competitive with everything out there.
Heck, it probably makes the whole 3d printing service bureau business model obsolete, because this puts high quality 3d printers in the cost range for small businesses.
This is probably the "attack of the killer micros" moment for the additive manufacturing industry.
Re: (Score:2)
Heck, it probably makes the whole 3d printing service bureau business model obsolete, because this puts high quality 3d printers in the cost range for small businesses.
Just like for photocopy machines.
[s]Once photocopy machines could be purchased by small businesses, everybody stopped using copy shops. [/sarcasm]
Re: (Score:1)
The literature from HP actually says that material reuse will be better than other systems because they have less exposure to the fusing process. Apparently other processes require more fusing energy, "aging" the material faster than HP's process.
And the service bureau model may actually become more common. Of course more businesses will be able to afford their own, but they might have smaller ones for making scale models and need to use a service bureau for full-size prototypes.
Once every corner store (thi
A good sign. (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a sign that years and years of mismanagement maybe didn't completely kill the ability for them to come up with interesting stuff This is exactly the kind of thing they need to do. Shore up HP Labs and solve some neat problems and ship cool stuff. Sure, let's be skeptical, but good for them for trying.
fused deposition modeling (Score:3)
The printer does not use fused deposition modeling [wikipedia.org]. It uses powder bed and inkjet head 3D printing [wikipedia.org]. It looks like the fusing agent is a heat or UV cured polymer that can be coloured.
What about the Linux drivers ? (Score:2)
I my old printer died (low usage so the ink jets clogged - Brother). I bought an HP Officejet since HP claimed that in worked with RedHat 6 [hplipopensource.com] (I run Centos 6 which is the same thing). The only support available have admitted a ''something wrong going on in the code'' and and go quiet when I asked when they would fix it [launchpad.net] a week ago.
In a couple of days time I will return it to where I bought it and buy something from a different manufacturer.
I hope that they will provide better drivers that do what they claim fo
Re: (Score:1)
Dude, why in the world are you messing with Centos 6? Ugh, cups in that thing is like 7 years old. Upgrade to 7 or Fedora. Not sure about the future of Cups ... Apple owns it now.
Tap the breaks - when? how much? (Score:1)
HP said they were going big in 3D printing most of a year ago. They said they would announce in June. The announcement time frame slipped 4 months. OK so nobody ever delivers on time. But notice they are not saying when or at what cost? I've been hearing some guesstimates at 2016 and over $100k.
Having some experience in 3D Systems equipment I'm going to say that if you have ever watched one of their ProJet 660 or 860 devices work, you could almost say that HP lifted a video of one of those devices working
Invest in Plastic (Score:1)
ob (Score:2)
Are there systemd drivers for it?
I like Epson printers (Score:1)
HP is good but EPSON is the best of printers (Score:1)