5 ms·

The 3D model absolutely can scale.

• dugditches 6y ago
  Sure. But for an equal amount of effort, raws and manpower you could get much more out of traditional manufacturing, much quicker. The product is a very simple stamp, with very simple dies with little wasted material. Perfect for traditional production methods. It's great people with machines are contributing to the effort, and empowering/informing individuals to be able to do so as well. But it's just done simpler traditionally.
  • blhack 6y ago
    This is all great in theory, but in reality there are hundreds of thousands of these parts being delivered to hospitals right now, and they came from lots of people with lots of 3D printers at their houses, hackerspaces, and printer farms. We can definitely talk about what would have been better and more efficient, but in the meantime people need this stuff today.
    • ogre_codes 6y ago
      It's not a zero sum game. It makes tons of sense for people with 3d printers to print as many as they can now because they can get them in the hands of people now. But once dedicated manufacturing comes online, that capability is going to be quickly become irrelevant. The comment I replied to seemed to suggest individuals were printing 10s of thousands of these per day which is clearly not true. Thousands of individuals are printing a few each day which is vastly different.
      • elsonrodriguez 6y ago
        > But once dedicated manufacturing comes online, that capability is going to be quickly become irrelevant. You're right, but after this emergency all those production lines will be retooled to things that are more profitable. The upside is that this pandemic has basically created a grass roots production network to fill gaps that will always exist in traditional manufacturing. If the next world-wide issue can be at least partially mitigated by small plastic parts, that gap will again be filled by 3d printers, and we're all better off for it.
  • kojeovo 6y ago
    These 3d printed ones are being delivered and used in hospitals in my area. Not sure in what quantity, but I'm sure they'd love traditional made ones too. If only it was being provided. So what you say isn't wrong in theory, but we're not dealing with an ideal situation in the first place.
  • kharak 6y ago
    I don't understand your argument. Those 3D printers exist and can be used. Manufacturing and those printers are not exclusive options.
    • dugditches 6y ago
      My "argument" was in response to the parent comment saying 3D Manufacturing can 'scale'. Which it certainly can, just not as simply or efficiently as traditional methods. Especially in this case with such a simple part. I didn't intend to impinge on the people helping hospitals or people with faceshields now via 3D manufacturing hence the 'It's good...' part. Rather simply comment on scaling up manufacturing methods.
  • paranoidrobot 6y ago
    > But for an equal amount of effort, raws and manpower you could get much more out of traditional manufacturing, much quicker. The set of people who have 3D Printers at home, and the set of people with access to large-scale injection-moulding facilities (along with tool production) likely have a very small overlap. I imagine those that do have access to those facilities were already trying to make those tools (assuming they wern't already occupied with other more urgent tasks). It just takes longer for them to scale up, and there's fewer of them in a smaller number of locations.