In the previous post I outlined some of the current developments in rapid manufacturing, and what lessons could be learned from the consumer adoption of technologies in the past. Access to a technology is only part of the picture though; if these technologies are to be used by consumers it requires that non-experts are able to design products and supply data to rapid manufacturing machines in a form that the machines understand. So in this part I will look at why the design rules which apply to rapid manufacturing makes it easier to design products.

One of the common features of mass manufacturing processes is that the means of production require substantial initial investment, however once in place the cost of manufacturing a single part or product (relative to the initial investment) is negligible. It is therefore a basic principle of mass manufacturing that as the number of parts produced increases, the cost of production of each individual part decreases. This inevitably leads to uniformity, since even small design changes require significant reinvestment in tooling. To get a return on the investment in the tooling, the number of parts produced must typically be in the tens or even hundreds of thousands. This makes manufacturing one-off or batch volume products virtually impossible without reverting to craft-like technologies.

Read the rest of this entry ▷

One of the basic assumptions behind my research is the belief that as rapid manufacturing technologies become cheaper and more available, consumers will design and make their own products. And most importantly, that this will happen whether designers, companies and brands sanction the activity or not. This is obviously a fairly sweeping statement, and so the next few posts will present my arguments as to why I believe this to be the case.

In 1977 Ken Olsen, founder and CEO of Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC), said in a speech to the World Future Society that he saw

“no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home.”

Olsen has since insisted that his prediction should be seen in the context of what was widely understood at the time by the term ‘computer’ – the mainframe and ‘mini’ computers with proprietary operating systems of the type which DEC were manufacturing. Nonetheless it’s a good illustration of the consequences of failing to recognise the consumer’s changing relationship to technology: Olsen was replaced as CEO in 1992 and DEC was bought by Compaq in 1998.

Read the rest of this entry ▷

‘Fab’ by Neil Gershenfeld, subtitled ‘The Coming Revolution on Your Desktop – from Personal Computers to Personal Fabrication’ has been on my ‘must read’ list ever since I first started thinking about my PhD topic. It seemed to be promising to address a lot of the issues I’m interested in regarding what will happen when consumers gain control of the means of production. As such it was something of a disappointment, concentrating mainly on signs of what is happening now, rather than in-depth implications for the future. I think it’s fair to say that ‘Fab’ was written for the ‘average’ reader rather than anyone working in the area of rapid manufacturing or fabbing. But there is still a lot to commend the book, and no doubt that it’s required reading from one of the earliest pioneers in the field.

Gershenfeld begins by describing a class he runs at MIT entitled “How to make (almost) anything,” which introduces students to CNC machines and rapid prototyping technologies. The enthusiasm with which he describes some of the students’ creations: a backpack which lets the wearer scream into it, a bike which can be built from water-jet cut polycarbonate, or a PC input device for parrots, makes clear the passion he has for the subject. It’s also clear that Gershenfeld sees himself as something of a revolutionary, freeing machines from the ownership of corporations and putting them in the hands of consumers, at the same time opening up opportunities for creativity which do not interest profit driven industries. But this passion also causes him to make assumptions about consumers’ motivations which are questionable and far from proven.

Read the rest of this entry ▷