If you’re reading this then the odds are pretty good that you already know what open source hardware is and why documentation is important.

So, you are the perfect person to follow this link and provide your input to the Open Hardware Toolchain Survey. Anonymous. 10-15 minutes max.

Not only will your perspective help to shape future hardware documentation tools, it will help guide the discussion at the Open Source Hardware Association’s (OSHWA) Documentation Jam in NYC April 26-29.

Zero Cost Modeling of Space Frames – Julian Edgar demonstrates how to predict the failure mode of a complex frame (in this case a recumbent bicycle) without FEA software. The process involves making a scale model by soldering together copper wire then pulling on it to see where it bends or breaks. It’s a quick and easy way to see where the structure is mathematically weak.

XYZ SpaceFrame Vehicles – This is a principle for building modular bicycles and a few functional real-world examples. Here’s a pdf describing how to make one of the bicycles.

Open Source Government & Engaged Citizens: The Death Star Inspiration – Matt Micene writes, “Innovation doesn’t always result in direct business value, but can improve business in general. Innovating in the open means you can garner additional expertise you need to transform a marginal value into a direct value.”

A Guide For 3D Printing With a RepRap – ArvidJense has put together an infographic to help makers build things, specifically musical instruments, but the ideas can be applied to anything.

Someone Needs To Buy Makerbot Already – Steve Symington is talking about financial investment stuffs, but the interesting thing is that Makerbot only seems to have attracted serious financial interest after (or based on the promise of) abandoning open source principles.

Party Robotics – They are a startup focused on making open source drink mixing machines.

Using OpenSCAD for 2D Machining – Matthew Venn gives a brief overview of his process for modeling a multi-piece part in OpenSCAD and then using the projection() function to export DXFs for CNC milling.

Designing For Laser Cutting In OpenSCAD – This is a similar (but more extensive) set of instructions from a Dutch FabLab.

Make Your Own Arduino – streetjerk shows you how to put together a thru-hole Arduino from raw materials. This is particularly useful if, like streetjerk, you want to incorporate additional components (like a motor driver) into the board itself rather than use I/O ports.

Prepper Movement Embracing 3D Printing – PosserteusMaximus has compiled a list of links on how the preppers/survivalist community is becoming aware of, using and contributing to open hardware and 3D printing.

One such tool is Aligni, a web-based tool that can be used to construct the entire BOM, coordinate with manufacturers and manage inventory. Oh, and Aligni wants to let open source projects use the site for free.

I interviewed Jake Janovetz on what Aligni can do for open source hardware.

Can you give me some background on where Aligni came from and what it’s been used for?

What open projects have used Aligni successfully?

Once an open project applies, how long does it take for them to get approved and start working? Does access ever expire? Is access limited to a certain number of team members?

Does open Aligni have all the same features as Aligni, or is it limited to core features. If so, what are they?

Every tool has a certain design space. What does Aligni not help with?

Most Makers trying to scale up quickly realize the only practical path forward is to outsource production.

Every single assumption, down to the color of the soldermask, has to be spelled out unambiguously for a third party to faithfully reproduce a design. Missing or incomplete documentation is the lead cause of production delays, defects, and cost overruns.

Here’s some of the things missing from the [typical] BOM:

• Approved manufacturer for each component
• Tolerance, material composition, and voltage spec for passive components
• Package type information for all parts
• Extended part numbers specific to each manufacturer

A complete BOM for an LED flasher also needs to include the PCB, battery, plastic case pieces, lens, screws, any labeling (for example, a serial number), a manual, and packaging (plastic bag plus cardboard box, for example). There may also need to be a master carton as a single boxed LED flasher is too small to ship on its own.

 

As part of his fundraising effort he came up with the cleverest reward that I’ve seen in a long time: a swimsuit calendar featuring many of the world’s open source technology leaders. Of course, I had to have one, and now I do, hot off the presses from Berlin. If looking at mine isn’t enough for you then you can get your own, or just creep middle-aged cartoons in speedos, right here.

Anyway, if we’re all being honest with each other in the community trust-tree…I feel like Make Magazine is trying to stir up a controversy. This post on their blog was the first I’d heard of anyone being upset because of the logo at the top of the page…as opposed to all of the new features that don’t work correctly. As for the question about whether or not the community thinks it’s time for a new 3D thing sharing site not run by a 3D printing company, well, to me it just sounds like they’re floating the idea of a Make Magazine 3D thing sharing site. You know, because the community wants it.

Some highlights from their blog comments are after the jump.

Make Magazine’s Blog

• The community always seems to get upset anytime changes occur on Thingiverse, which probably stems from the fact that the community thinks it owns the site. Yes, Thingiverse was started by Zach Smith in 2008, but it was created as a companion website to Makerbot.com. MakerBot and its employee have operated, maintained, and paid for the website ever since.
  
  •  I can hardly fault Makerbot for wanting to reap some rewards with newcomers by flashing their name on a site that provides access to so many printables. If that was their goal, they could have accomplished the same thing by putting a ‘brought to you by’ or ‘powered by’ slogan featured prominently on the site instead of changing the whole name.
  •  Phillip Torrone – this post makes it hard for makerbot to participate, when you say “there seems to be a lot of uproar” but not linking to any examples…out of all the 3d printing companies, i pick makerbot. do we want 3d systems who is suing formlabs *and* kickstarter to run one instead?
    • davidcdean - it’s just tacky behavior when people are already a little testy about MakerBot.
    • Gareth Branwyn - This is Michael’s first post and some of this confusion might be coming from the fact that I edited it to try and interject a more editorial tone and balance the two sides…The rough piece was originally slanted, I felt, too far towards the MakerBot side and I wanted to open it up
      • Michael Overstreet - Maybe I am over reacting to all of the negative posts I have seen on the 3d printing forums that I follow? I still think I have two very valid questions. One, why do some many people get upset ever time there is a change to Thingiverse? Two, maybe it is time for a 3rd party who does not sell printers to create a website similar to Thingiverse?
  • David Randolph - The most controversial thing I’ve seen about it so far is this post. I’m very active on the makerbot user group on google and the complaints have been about bugs or usability.
  • kongorilla - I don’t think there’s an “uproar” over Makerbot making their logo more prominent. Most people “in the 3D printing community” always new it was a Makerbot site. Yes, I’ve seen forum posts by people who never noticed the subtle grey logo that was there before, but hardly an uproar…no matter how much good work Makerbot puts into Thingiverse, the community has put in hundreds of times more. It’s important for Makerbot to hear and respond to the concerns of the 3D community, because without them there’ll only be a few Makerbot sponsored items on the site.
  • Bill Baumgarner - The uproar from many of us is not because of “MakerBot Thingiverse” — annoying as that is — but because the “cosmetic changes” make the site nearly unusable…The real problem is that MakerBot’s update to Thingiverse is awful. It is a step backwards in usability and greatly undermines the sites usefulness.
    • Bre Pettis - For those that criticize us for adding MakerBot to the heading, we did that because we are proud of the work we do with Thingiverse and even though I think most Make: readers know it’s a MakerBot website, we kept getting surprised reactions from folks who have been using it and didn’t know it was us working on it…We’re going to keep pushing the site forward, making it more usable, and doing our best to make it better.

However, 3D printing has weaknesses, not the least of which is that it can’t work in metal.* You can take the plastic parts and cast metal parts from them, but the heat and gases have side effects that nobody in their right mind would ever allow inside a house. It is possible to work metal by machining it in a small CNC mill, as demonstrated by the ease of finding a desktop mill on Google. Since 3D printers and CNC mills function so similarly, why not combine both functions into one machine?

QU-BD is working on that. Openalia interviewed them back when they were coming off of a successful effort to Kickstarter their own thermoplastic extruder. Now they’ve arrived at the main event, the beta Rapid Prototyping Mill (RPM) pre-order. This design is important because it has the potential to create all of the (non-electrical) parts for a 3D printer, including its own extruder. Read through the interview with Chelsea Thompson after the jump to learn a little bit about the RPM and the Revolution, which is an all-metal frame 3D printer.

* I’m limiting the analysis to current technology. Sure, there might be an unforeseen breakthrough in materials science in the near future, but that’s a different discussion.

Are there plans to release design documents for the extruder, control panel and/or the RPM?

Yes, we have modeled everything in Solidworks from the beginning so we will be releasing those as well as STL versions. Lots of programs can import STL files but not everyone has access to Solidworks so we are going to be releasing both.

I’m confused by separating the RPM from the milling components. Isn’t the whole point of a rigid frame and powerful motors to allow for milling? Do you expect anyone to purchase the RPM and then only do 3D printing with it?

We have had 3 of the units that we have presold be purchased without the milling package. We do expect some people to use it for 3D printing only as it has a HUGE build area and is very accurate.

At 70 lbs does the RPM max out the dimensions and weight you can ship?

…shipping was a constraint as we didn’t want to have to have a freight company ship it.

What are the limitations of the driver software?

It would be nice to be able to use a single software package to laser scan a part, then 3D print it, then mill the part, etc.

It looks like the primary mechanism for allowing fast 3D printing and strong milling in the same package is a pair of reversible pulleys, is that accurate?

The reversible pulleys do allow an effective gearing to allow high speeds or high-torque and resolution modes.

Is there a similar way to change the ratio for the z axis?

Yes although we found it to be unecessary on the Z-Axis, since it moves more than fast enough for 3D printing and has plenty of resolution and torque for milling.

What sort of synergy would you say you’ve achieved by packing both features into the same machine?

For now, flexibility is the RPMs greatest strength.

Since you’ve got some professional machinists hanging around, can you illustrate any killer applications for a printing/milling combo machine? For example, can the RPM produce all the parts for the extruder?

The RPM can actually produce all the machined parts for itself and the extruder, save for the exterior panels which are larger than the build area, except the screws. However, with the 4th axis attachment theoretically you should be able to make the screws, although we haven’t tried that yet!

It sounds like you guys are swinging for the fence with this design. Can you compare the cost and performance (or other features) to existing printing/milling combos like the WhiteAnt and Zen?

Let me first say that the WhiteAnt and Zen CNC inspired us but they aren’t really an apples to apples comparison. Both are DIY assembly and use significantly lighter duty assemblies, however they are also both less expensive by a pretty big margin as compared to our RPM.

It looks like all four corners of the z axis are driven.

It is unusual. The reason we chose to drive the Z-Axis on all four corners is because of balance. Despite making it more difficult (by requiring more precision) to manufacture, what we found, was that linear bearings were not accurate enough to prevent deflection during drilling operations. We aren’t operating under the same design considerations as most 3D printers or light-duty mills.

Along those same lines, I have to admit to being confused by the picture of the Revolution. If it’s just a 3D printer why does it need such a strong metal frame? are there two motors each for the x and y axes? Are the motors for the z axis underneath it?

The more rigid the frame the higher the accuracy, speed and repeatability it will have. Considering that the Revolution and Revolution XL are comparable price wise with a lot of other machines on the market think of it as a more robust platform for free (and a smaller footprint too)! Yes there are two motors on X-Y and Z (underneath the printer along with the power supply and electronics).

Is the Revolution supposed to be able to do light milling (like PCBs) in the future?

We haven’t tested the Revolution or RXL with any light duty milling although I don’t see why it wouldn’t work.

You’ve been to Maker Faire, finalized the mechanical design, and expanded the upgrades. What have you guys learned since the last interview?

There is a serious need for a supplier that has high quality, inexpensive pulleys and belts…we are going to attempt to step up to be that supplier. We were going crazy with how much they cost and how irritating the buying experience was.

There’s a petition up on the White House’s website to assign NASA the task of a feasibility study. Only 20,000 more signatures to go! Interestingly, they decided to go with a promotional graphic that is eerily similar to that scene from Independence Day when a spacecraft blew up the white house.