3-d Systems (TDSC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : 3-d Systems (TDSC)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Stratajema who wrote (19)	2/4/1997 2:29:00 AM
From: Brian VanHiel	of 132

David, I agree with much of what you are saying. However I don't think that SSYS's position is at all secure (and niether is 3D's). I think that that 3D has the potential to catch up to FDM's popularity with the Actua because of it's speed (and hence lower per model cost). I also believe that as more robust materials are identified for use in the Actua the remains of FDM's and Genisys's advantage will slip away. Envision the FDM process (and the Genisys) as a pen plotter. Material is only extruded from one point. Thus the print head has to move over every point in the part volume. Making the print head smaller by a half to increase accuracy increases the build time by a factor of 8 assuming the same head speed and a layer thickness similar to the print head size. The Actua process is like an inkjet printer. Because the print head has multiple jets the print head (which is currently 2in wide) can ideally make only one pass per layer. Thus increasing the accuracy by reducing the jet size by half only increases the build time by a factor of 4. Right now the only disadvantage of Actua is that it has not developed a stronger material. While this is a technical challenge it is not an impossibility. This is why I have more faith in the future of 3D than SSYS. 3D seemingly has much more room to improve it's process for Actua. You also mentioned earlier that the Actua seemed large compared to a FDM 1600. The Actua has the workstation built in while the FDM has a separate workstation taking up space elsewhere. Where do you hear anything about metals developement at SSYS? Their process is not very conducive to metals processing. The only alternative is a multi-step process. SLS and maybe LOM have a chance to make metals work directly (they are still a ways away now) but I don't see an FDM machine extruding metal at 1000 degrees C in an office environment anytime soon. I may be wrong, but I would be interested to hear what they are planning. The only applications for which metal RP is currently valuable is in the creation of a few parts of complex shape (such as injection molds or aerospace castings). Otherwise it is cheaper and faster (even for 1) to have such parts machined (possibly using NC machining) or cast from a nonmetal RP master. I think 3D is already way ahead of SSYS in terms of metal. With quickcast and the aquisition of Keltool, 3D can create fully dense metal parts accurately and reliably (something SLS hasn't been able to do). As for bigger, an SLA 500 still has a slightly larger build envelope than an 8000.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next