Why a 3D printer is not a printer
I have long disliked the word printer used for additive-layer synthesis machines. There was no reason to write about this whole article, but having accumulated irritation from the articles and comments where these machines are mentioned, I decided that the reason was not too necessary.
There are several reasons for my dislike. Some of the arguments may seem controversial, but in the complex they, in my opinion, are quite strong. From a practical point of view, the article is completely useless, but it seems to me that when discussing 3D printers it is useful to know these arguments, to understand and somewhere in the background to remember.
For a start, let's turn to those processes that are actually called printing. Interestingly, there are no disagreements between the Russian and English languages: what to type , what to print means exactly the same actions.
First, it is the process of applying an imprint — sometimes flat, sometimes embossed — onto some more or less flat base. The basis, of course, is not any: such actions with metal are not a seal, but chasing, and with leather - stamping. But in general, the definition is true. Printed gingerbread, wax seal, that's all. Many books, and until recently in general all, are printed in this way from ancient times. Here one could recall Guttenberg, but he did not invent the printing of books - only a set of individual letters and a dial-up box office. One way or another, for at least five years, the word seal meant nothing else.
')
By the way, it’s not just about the imprint, but about the imprint at once, in one pass on the entire surface. Note that the typewriter is still a typewriter, not a typewriter. The second name is found, but much less often even now, and at the beginning of the twentieth century it was almost exclusively writing. Same in English: typewriter, not printer. Although the mechanism of action, it is quite a printer: causes a print.
For several centuries, however, books, newspapers and other printed materials have so merged with the concept of printing that any application of something on paper that is not done by hand has been called printing. First began to print photos. Judging by the google ngram, this did not happen immediately: the first few decades they were made. Then came the office printers. At first they were mechanically the same typewriters, only automated, then matrix, inkjet, laser happened. None of them tolerate an imprint of the entire page at once, and the laser and inkjet do not deal with prints at all, however, they firmly entered the life and language.
3D printers, as is easy to see, have nothing to do with printing at all: do not make prints and do not make books. Although there is something in common - a nozzle - they have inkjet printers, and even then, the similarity is very approximate. Although it is because of this similarity that they got their name. So we are dealing with a "linguistic derivative" of the second order. So what, you ask? Once the name of the printing process has spread to the streamers, what prevents to spread it further, if the language needs it? In general, it is. Do not count the words that today have a completely different meaning than a hundred, and even more than five hundred years ago. But there is a nuance.
Now there is a tendency to unite all stratified synthesis machines into one large group and oppose them together to traditional machines. At first glance, this is logical: after all, in the first approximation we do not make a difference between a cutting tool or machine tool for wood and metal, or between different types of machining. Although the saw does not make the chiseled leg of the chair, and the lathe does not cut the log into boards, it’s still and then machining. So, it would seem, and synthesizing machines can be combined: what's the difference, how to apply the next layer, if it is applied?
But the differences within them are much stronger than they appear. Cutting ultimately boils down to one process of cutting off a piece of material from another piece of material. In the category of 3D printers, extrusion machines making plastic parts were introduced, from expensive and precise for master jewelry models to cheap “household”; and laser sintering and fusing machines, which have much more in common with traditional powder metallurgy than with extrusion technologies; and even automatic pouring of thick concrete.
Laser machines are very expensive and complex, the raw materials for them are also much more expensive than plastics, and it is almost always easier to cut a part from the workpiece; their field of application is extremely narrow. However, because of the common name, people often confuse “adult” machines with household tools and are confident that pretty soon they will have this at home, and the transition of all plants to additive technologies is practically solved - only time is needed.
And in general, the very name of the “3D printer” provokes the idea that “well, this is the same printer as I have on the table, only 3D. Yes, while dear, and not everything is able, but soon will become cheaper and learn. ” Not cheaper and will not learn. And this is the main reason why I do not like this name. A 3D printer is not a printing set-top box for a computer, it is a machine. No better and no worse than turning or milling.
How many of you have at home not so much a milling machine, but at least a workbench and a vice? So: if you do not have a workbench, then there will be no 3D ‑ printer. This is a complete, real machine , which is needed only in three places: in the home workshop, in the laboratory, in the workshop of individual production.
If you have a hobby, you want to do something at home, please. Milling, turning, additive - each machine is good in its own way, and neither can fully replace the other. Choose what is more necessary and more interesting to you personally. Just understand that in any case you need either a separate room for the workshop, or a readiness for the living room to become a workshop.
If you need to make prototypes of several products - well, an additive plastic machine will cost your laboratory much cheaper than a few plastic injection molds. As soon as you enter the series, casting will be cheaper.
If you need to make three products of a very tricky form - a rocket engine with complex channels for cooling or something like that - contact those who have a powder-laser machine. If the product needs to be produced serially, find a way to simplify it and adapt it at least under the CNC machining center. Will come out almost certainly faster, cheaper and stronger.
The average person doesn’t need a 3D printer. How many people do not need a photo printer: once it seemed that everyone would print photos at home, but it turned out that they were no longer printed at all, they were looking directly from the screen. If, nevertheless, it is necessary to print, it is often easier to go to the photo lab than to buy a printer. If you have a broken plastic part, it will be cheaper to buy it, or order it in a workshop where there is already a 3D printer, and where it is made of ten parts per day, rather than three per year. If the metal is broken, then additive technologies will not help you at all. There are no "household" metal printers and they will not be in the foreseeable future, and most likely never. Road and do not need.
Nothing, alas.
Unfortunately, the language has already “swallowed” this expression. It is pointless to struggle with 3D ‑ printers, as it is senseless to fight against, for example, the words plant . A literate person today will never say so - just plant , but no matter how annoying it is, the language changes, vernacular , with the spread of the Internet, is being used more and more often in print, and perhaps it will become the norm; to go against the flow is useless. It makes no sense to demand routers or routers instead of routers - the router has already entered the language, it’s too late and you don’t need to change it.
If a language needs a 3D printer, it will be there. Even in my note, a 3D printer is three times more often than an additive machine. But it is useful not to forget that it is actually a machine, not a printer.
There are several reasons for my dislike. Some of the arguments may seem controversial, but in the complex they, in my opinion, are quite strong. From a practical point of view, the article is completely useless, but it seems to me that when discussing 3D printers it is useful to know these arguments, to understand and somewhere in the background to remember.
Printer that does not print
For a start, let's turn to those processes that are actually called printing. Interestingly, there are no disagreements between the Russian and English languages: what to type , what to print means exactly the same actions.
First, it is the process of applying an imprint — sometimes flat, sometimes embossed — onto some more or less flat base. The basis, of course, is not any: such actions with metal are not a seal, but chasing, and with leather - stamping. But in general, the definition is true. Printed gingerbread, wax seal, that's all. Many books, and until recently in general all, are printed in this way from ancient times. Here one could recall Guttenberg, but he did not invent the printing of books - only a set of individual letters and a dial-up box office. One way or another, for at least five years, the word seal meant nothing else.
')
By the way, it’s not just about the imprint, but about the imprint at once, in one pass on the entire surface. Note that the typewriter is still a typewriter, not a typewriter. The second name is found, but much less often even now, and at the beginning of the twentieth century it was almost exclusively writing. Same in English: typewriter, not printer. Although the mechanism of action, it is quite a printer: causes a print.
For several centuries, however, books, newspapers and other printed materials have so merged with the concept of printing that any application of something on paper that is not done by hand has been called printing. First began to print photos. Judging by the google ngram, this did not happen immediately: the first few decades they were made. Then came the office printers. At first they were mechanically the same typewriters, only automated, then matrix, inkjet, laser happened. None of them tolerate an imprint of the entire page at once, and the laser and inkjet do not deal with prints at all, however, they firmly entered the life and language.
3D printers, as is easy to see, have nothing to do with printing at all: do not make prints and do not make books. Although there is something in common - a nozzle - they have inkjet printers, and even then, the similarity is very approximate. Although it is because of this similarity that they got their name. So we are dealing with a "linguistic derivative" of the second order. So what, you ask? Once the name of the printing process has spread to the streamers, what prevents to spread it further, if the language needs it? In general, it is. Do not count the words that today have a completely different meaning than a hundred, and even more than five hundred years ago. But there is a nuance.
Such different 3D printers
Now there is a tendency to unite all stratified synthesis machines into one large group and oppose them together to traditional machines. At first glance, this is logical: after all, in the first approximation we do not make a difference between a cutting tool or machine tool for wood and metal, or between different types of machining. Although the saw does not make the chiseled leg of the chair, and the lathe does not cut the log into boards, it’s still and then machining. So, it would seem, and synthesizing machines can be combined: what's the difference, how to apply the next layer, if it is applied?
But the differences within them are much stronger than they appear. Cutting ultimately boils down to one process of cutting off a piece of material from another piece of material. In the category of 3D printers, extrusion machines making plastic parts were introduced, from expensive and precise for master jewelry models to cheap “household”; and laser sintering and fusing machines, which have much more in common with traditional powder metallurgy than with extrusion technologies; and even automatic pouring of thick concrete.
Laser machines are very expensive and complex, the raw materials for them are also much more expensive than plastics, and it is almost always easier to cut a part from the workpiece; their field of application is extremely narrow. However, because of the common name, people often confuse “adult” machines with household tools and are confident that pretty soon they will have this at home, and the transition of all plants to additive technologies is practically solved - only time is needed.
Apartment or workshop?
And in general, the very name of the “3D printer” provokes the idea that “well, this is the same printer as I have on the table, only 3D. Yes, while dear, and not everything is able, but soon will become cheaper and learn. ” Not cheaper and will not learn. And this is the main reason why I do not like this name. A 3D printer is not a printing set-top box for a computer, it is a machine. No better and no worse than turning or milling.
How many of you have at home not so much a milling machine, but at least a workbench and a vice? So: if you do not have a workbench, then there will be no 3D ‑ printer. This is a complete, real machine , which is needed only in three places: in the home workshop, in the laboratory, in the workshop of individual production.
If you have a hobby, you want to do something at home, please. Milling, turning, additive - each machine is good in its own way, and neither can fully replace the other. Choose what is more necessary and more interesting to you personally. Just understand that in any case you need either a separate room for the workshop, or a readiness for the living room to become a workshop.
If you need to make prototypes of several products - well, an additive plastic machine will cost your laboratory much cheaper than a few plastic injection molds. As soon as you enter the series, casting will be cheaper.
If you need to make three products of a very tricky form - a rocket engine with complex channels for cooling or something like that - contact those who have a powder-laser machine. If the product needs to be produced serially, find a way to simplify it and adapt it at least under the CNC machining center. Will come out almost certainly faster, cheaper and stronger.
The average person doesn’t need a 3D printer. How many people do not need a photo printer: once it seemed that everyone would print photos at home, but it turned out that they were no longer printed at all, they were looking directly from the screen. If, nevertheless, it is necessary to print, it is often easier to go to the photo lab than to buy a printer. If you have a broken plastic part, it will be cheaper to buy it, or order it in a workshop where there is already a 3D printer, and where it is made of ten parts per day, rather than three per year. If the metal is broken, then additive technologies will not help you at all. There are no "household" metal printers and they will not be in the foreseeable future, and most likely never. Road and do not need.
What to do?
Nothing, alas.
Unfortunately, the language has already “swallowed” this expression. It is pointless to struggle with 3D ‑ printers, as it is senseless to fight against, for example, the words plant . A literate person today will never say so - just plant , but no matter how annoying it is, the language changes, vernacular , with the spread of the Internet, is being used more and more often in print, and perhaps it will become the norm; to go against the flow is useless. It makes no sense to demand routers or routers instead of routers - the router has already entered the language, it’s too late and you don’t need to change it.
If a language needs a 3D printer, it will be there. Even in my note, a 3D printer is three times more often than an additive machine. But it is useful not to forget that it is actually a machine, not a printer.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/444032/
All Articles