You seemed to suggest that 3D printer is never the ideal way to make something, but of course if I need the part as soon as possible 3D printing usually is.
My long rant about CNC machining was meant to highlight the huge amount of labor involved in machining things. It takes a lot of human skill to write a CNC program (I do expect that to eventually change though) and more labor to set up the machine to get the first part made. In the time it would take me to CNC something I can print a part while I eat a sandwich or run some errands.
Of course 3D prints are slow to produce, but that is counteracted by the fact that it takes less of my involvement to get the parts made. It takes less overall effort to produce a part by print than by machining.
I mentioned metal but the entire story I wrote applies to plastic machining as well - just replace "Campbell Metal" with "Professional Plastics". They're both across from the Fry's off Brokaw.
I totally don't expect most people to have "run into" a time where home 3D printing is best, but you can still do thought experiments. 3D printing is far more accessible to most people than CNC machining is. As home machines get better and we gain more critical mass of users, we will see more designers who take advantage of the stuff that can be made at home. That's what I'm doing with 3D printable robots, and luckily I have a good intersection between people who want to make robots and people who own a 3D printer.
I would say the two key differences between 3D printing and machining is that 3D printing takes zero skill to operate and zero or near-zero labor. Not all home machines have delivered on the ease of use promise of course, but that is an issue with the machines, not the process.
My point is, no other manufacturing technique is well-suited for use at home aside from perhaps laser cutting. The value in printing is of course not the quality of the parts, but the fact that it is a type of manufacturing accessible to consumers. Imagine if Dyson provided printable replacement parts for example, and you can begin to see the value.
Every manufacturing technique has trade offs. A single print takes longer than machining a single part, but with less set-up. Time to first part can often be lower on a 3D printer.
My long rant about CNC machining was meant to highlight the huge amount of labor involved in machining things. It takes a lot of human skill to write a CNC program (I do expect that to eventually change though) and more labor to set up the machine to get the first part made. In the time it would take me to CNC something I can print a part while I eat a sandwich or run some errands.
Of course 3D prints are slow to produce, but that is counteracted by the fact that it takes less of my involvement to get the parts made. It takes less overall effort to produce a part by print than by machining.
I mentioned metal but the entire story I wrote applies to plastic machining as well - just replace "Campbell Metal" with "Professional Plastics". They're both across from the Fry's off Brokaw.
I totally don't expect most people to have "run into" a time where home 3D printing is best, but you can still do thought experiments. 3D printing is far more accessible to most people than CNC machining is. As home machines get better and we gain more critical mass of users, we will see more designers who take advantage of the stuff that can be made at home. That's what I'm doing with 3D printable robots, and luckily I have a good intersection between people who want to make robots and people who own a 3D printer.
I would say the two key differences between 3D printing and machining is that 3D printing takes zero skill to operate and zero or near-zero labor. Not all home machines have delivered on the ease of use promise of course, but that is an issue with the machines, not the process.
My point is, no other manufacturing technique is well-suited for use at home aside from perhaps laser cutting. The value in printing is of course not the quality of the parts, but the fact that it is a type of manufacturing accessible to consumers. Imagine if Dyson provided printable replacement parts for example, and you can begin to see the value.
Every manufacturing technique has trade offs. A single print takes longer than machining a single part, but with less set-up. Time to first part can often be lower on a 3D printer.