Robot silkworms to print architectural structure

Robot silk worms to print pavilion

Researchers at MIT plan to 3D print a 3m-high pavilion by imitating the way a silkworm builds its cocoon.

The Mediated Matter Group at MIT’s Media Lab will use a robotic arm to print a structure using silk fibres bound together with a biodegradable glue. Unlike traditional 3D printing the CNSILK Pavilion will be “freeform” printed without the use of support material to hold it up during construction.

The research team, headed by architect and Mediated Matter Group founder Neri Oxman, attached tiny magnets to the heads of silkworms to discover how they “print” their pupal casings around themselves.

“We’ve managed to motion-track the movement as the silkworm is building its cocoon,” said Oxman. “We translated the data to a 3D printer that’s connected to a robotic arm.”

Robot silk worms to print pavilion

Above: Silkworm motion tracking; Bombyx mori silkworm spinning within a sensor rig. From the “Silk Pavilion” project by the Mediated Matter Group, MIT Media Lab. Image by the Mediated Matter Group, MIT Media Lab

Top: colour scanning electron microscope image of the exterior surface of a silk moth cocoon. Image by Dr. James C. Weaver, Wyss Institute, Harvard University

The arm will deposit silk fibres as well as a gluey “matrix” using the same figure-of-eight motion a silk worm uses to build its casing. “Like the silkworm, you’re using the robotic arm to move freely in space, printing or depositing the material,” said Oxman.

The pavilion is part of a research project to explore ways of overcoming the existing limitations of 3D printing and follows recent proposals for a house made of 3D printed concrete sections and a dwelling made of prefabricated plastic elements.

Today’s printers are only able to produce homogeneous materials with the same properties throughout, whereas natural materials often exhibit varying properties, or “gradients”. A silk worm, for example, is able to produce a cocoon with a tough exterior and soft interior by varying the density and pattern of the silk fibres it deposits.

Robot silk worms to print pavilion

Above: custom multi-fiber extrusion head on KUKA robotic arm. From the “Silk Pavilion” project by the Mediated Matter Group, MIT Media Lab. Image by the Mediated Matter Group, MIT Media Lab

“What’s so fascinating about the silk worm is that it creates the cocoon, which is this eggshell of fibrous geometry, out of one continuous kilometre of silk,” Oxman said.

“It’s moving its head and its body in an 8-figure in a way that allows for the distribution of the silk depending on the structural and environmental performance. For instance the inner layers of the cocoon are soft while the outer layers of the cocoon are stiff. The silk worm can vary its properties according to its function.”

The CNSilk (Computer Numerically Controlled Silk Cocoon Construction) Pavilion will be built using a KUKA robotic arm at MIT’s MediaLab on 22 April and will measure 12 feet by 12 feet.

“We’ll be able to show the robotic arm depositing the silk using its six axes to construct the pavilion,” said Oxman. “The robotic arm will have a deposition head for the matrix, the glue material. That will help stick the fibres together in the areas we need them.”

Robot silk worms to print pavilion

Above: Dissected silkworm cocoon. Image by Dr. James C. Weaver, Wyss Institute, Harvard University

The team are considering using a new material called shrilk as the gluey matrix. Developed at Harvard, shrilk is made of a mixture of discarded shrimp shells and proteins extracted from silk. Shrilk is similar to the hard, lightweight material found in insect’s shells.

Oxman believes that freeform printing using robot arms has more potential for architecture than existing 3D printing systems, which use gantries that can only move in three directions and which require complex support structures to be printed at the same time to prevent the building components collapsing under their own weight.

“Traditional 3D printing has a gantry-size that is limiting; it has three axes, which are limiting; it has support material, which is limiting,” explains Oxman. “Once we put it on a robotic arm, we free up these limitations. If we use a boom arm with a 20 metre reach, we can basically control not only the variation of properties but also how we choose to assemble the various parts together.”

Robot silk worms to print pavilion

Above: X-ray photograph of a dried Bombyx mori pupa in a completed silk cocoon. From the “Silk Pavilion” project by the Mediated Matter Group, MIT Media Lab. Image by Dr. James C. Weaver, Wyss Institute, Harvard University

In future, buildings could be constructed by swarms of tiny robots, she said. “I would argue that 3D printing is a method of depositing material rather than a technology, and once you think about it in that way you release yourself and you don’t just see it on a gantry. You can see it on a robotic arm, you can see it on a multi-agency system of lots of tiny robots that are printing together to print something bigger. Once you release the need to think of a 3D printing platform as gantry-related you can dream in lots of exciting new ways.”

However Oxman said that in the immediate future, 3D printing is more likely to be used for architectural components instead of complete buildings.

“We’ll probably be seeing more and more structural printing for facades and for building components that are maybe not globally structural. Once we figure out the scale limitation, once we move from a small arm to a boom arm, then we’ll actually be able to print a building. But probably in the next decade we’ll only see building components, furniture and products. It will take quite a while until we’re able to implement these technologies in the context of an entire building.”

The CNSilk Pavilion is being developed by Mediated Matter group at the MIT Media Lab in collaboration with James Weaver at the WYSS Institute and Professor Fiorenzo Omenetto at TUFTS University.

The post Robot silkworms to print architectural structure appeared first on Dezeen.

Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed football boot studs

Sports brand Nike has unveiled the first boots for American football players with 3D-printed studs (+ slideshow).

Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed football boots

Nike’s Vapor Laser Talon boots are fitted with a footplate made by selective laser sintering, a process that uses lasers to fuse small particles of material together.

Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed football boots

With laser sintering, Nike’s designers were able to prototype the boots much faster than usual and make updates as they went along. In future, boots could be individually shaped for each player.

Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed football boots

The 3D-printed footplate also makes the boot extremely light, weighing in at 158 grams, and improves traction on the turf to help players run faster. According to the sportswear company, the boots can markedly improve a player’s “40-yard dash” time – the standard measure used by scouts to assess speed and ability.

Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed football boots

We’ve published lots of Nike shoes featuring the latest sports technology, including the spike pads worn by Paralympic sprinter Oscar Pistorius and football boots partly made from castor beans – see all Nike design.

Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed football boots

We’ve also been reporting on the rise of 3D printing, recently featuring proposals to print a lunar base with moon dust and an interview with a designer who wants to 3D print a house – see all 3D printing news.

Here’s more information from Nike:


The quest for acceleration and speed has long been the north star for athletes across sport, and in order to excel in the game of football, the mastery of these skills is seen in the 40-yard dash. Played out on a national stage in Indianapolis, pro scouts clock 40-yard dash times in order to assess and translate these measurements to a football athlete’s game-time ability.

Today, Nike Football debuted the Nike Vapor Laser Talon with a revolutionary 3D printed plate that will help football athletes perform at their best. In a version built to master the 40, the Nike Vapor Laser Talon weighs a mere 5.6 oz. and is specifically designed to provide optimal traction on football turf and to help athletes maintain their “drive stance” longer.

With more than 40 years of athlete insights and innovation across sport, Nike designers worked with elite trainers within Nike SPARQ as well as long time partner and gold medal sprinter Michael Johnson to understand how he and his team at Michael Johnson Performance train football athletes for the 40. According to MJP Performance Director, Lance Walker, an athlete’s “Zero Step” is a pivotal point that can make or break an athlete’s 40 time. In the moments before that first step hits the turf, his propulsion and acceleration speed are determined. At that point, it’s all about geometry.

“Nike’s new 3D printed plate is contoured to allow football athletes to maintain their drive position longer and more efficiently, helping them accelerate faster through the critical first 10 yards of the 40,” said Johnson. “Translated to the game of football, mastering the Zero Step can mean the difference between a defensive lineman sacking the quarterback or getting blocked.”

The plate of the cleat is crafted using Selective Laser Sintering technology (SLS). It is the sport’s first 3D-printed plate. SLS is a manufacturing technique that uses high-powered lasers to fuse small particles of materials into a three-dimentional shape. Through proprietary material selection, Nike was able to prototype a fully functional plate and traction system within a fraction of the traditional timeframe and at a fraction of the weight. The SLS process allows for the engineering and creation of shapes not possible in traditional manufacturing processes. It also provides the ability to make design updates within hours instead of months to truly accelerate the innovation process to never seen speeds.

“SLS technology has revolutionized the way we design cleat plates – even beyond football – and gives Nike the ability to create solutions that were not possible within the constraints of traditional manufacturing processes,” said Shane Kohatsu, Director of Nike Footwear Innovation.

The way athletes train continues to evolve, and Nike continues to push the boundaries of innovation even further. By listening to the voice of the athlete, Nike is able to evolve footwear, apparel and equipment to help athletes achieve their highest potential.

The post Nike Vapor Laser Talon 3D printed
football boot studs
appeared first on Dezeen.

Pen that doodles 3D objects attracts $500,000 on Kickstarter

3Doodler by WobbleWorks

News: a pen that can “print” 3D drawings in mid-air has attracted nearly $500,000 in one day from Kickstarter backers (+ movie).

The $75 3Doodler by U.S. toy and robotics company WobbleWorks is described on the crowdfunding website as the world’s first 3D printing pen.

It works like a hot glue gun to extrude plastic filament in a fine line, which quickly cools and solidifies into a stable structure.

3Doodler by WobbleWorks

With no need for software or computers, the 3Doodler acts as a handheld version of the extrusion element found in many 3D printers.

WobbleWorks suggest it could be used to make 3D models, jewellery and ornaments as well as to personalise objects like phone cases.

3Doodler by WobbleWorks

The designers are also working on a selection of stencil kits allowing users to draw out shapes on a flat surface before connecting them into 3D objects.

The pen currently has over 5500 backers on Kickstarter, with 32 days remaining for new backers to pledge their funding.

3Doodler by WobbleWorks

We’ve been following all the latest developments in 3D printing, including the race to build the first 3D-printed house and plans to 3D print buildings on the moon with lunar soil – see all news about 3D printing.

Photographs are by WobbleWorks.

3Doodler by WobbleWorks

The post Pen that doodles 3D objects attracts
$500,000 on Kickstarter
appeared first on Dezeen.

3D printed houses are “not that far off”

Interview: earlier today, London studio Softkill Design unveiled plans for a 3D printed house. We spoke to Softkill’s Gilles Retsin about the viability of printed architecture and how he intends to print a plastic dwelling in just three weeks.

“When we started this research, it was a kind of science fiction,” he says. “It’s not actually that far off any more.”

Amy Frearson: Tell us how the project came about.

Gilles Retsin: The prototype, ProtoHouse 1.0, started as academic research at the AA Design Research Lab. That was the very first time that someone completely designed a building through 3D printing that was considered a house, where all the elements of a house, which means structure, cladding, interior, finishing, were printed.

So the ProtoHouse 1.0 was the first prototype for a 3D printed building. It’s obviously not printed in reality but that’s the first ever design for a completely 3D printed building.

We [Softkill Design] have been working for the past few months on making a market-friendly version. It’s a much smaller, much cheaper construction so you can work through the problems. When I say small scale, I am talking about something that is roughly around eight metres wide and four or five metres long.

Amy Frearson: So this will be the first 3D printed house?

Gilles Retsin: I mean, we call it a house for marketing purposes but it’s only 8 by 5 metres. So it’s a small house.

Above: the Radiolaria pavilion by Andrea Morgante of Shiro Studio was printed on Enrico Dini’s D-Shape printer in 2009.

There have been a number of others, like Enrico Dini, who printed a kind of building structure [using his D-Shape printer], calling that a house. But it’s just not a house from a design point of view because it’s really only two or three metres and it’s not actually an entire building. If we manage to build ProtoHouse 2.0 it will hopefully be the first actual 3D printed house on site.

Amy Frearson: What material are you building it with?

Gilles Retsin: Our approach is different from the current approach [to 3D printing buildings]. We’re building it off site, so we’re constructing it in a factory, in a normal 3D manufacturing [facility], so we’re not moving a printer on site. The existing research and precedents always focus on transporting a big 3D printer on site, which basically is because they’re using sand or concrete. We are working deliberately in a factory and we are using laser-sintered bioplastic.

Amy Frearson: It will be built in pieces. How many pieces will there be and how big will they be?

Gilles Retsin: It’s around eight pieces. The pieces are transportable in a small van, which means they’re about 2-2.5 metres long and about one metre [wide].

Amy Frearson: How much will it cost?

Gilles Retsin: We have to remain confidential about this. However, the cost balance of material, time, and logistics in a growing industry means the cost of the Protohouse could be a viable competitor to traditional means of manufacture and build in the relatively near future.

Amy Frearson: Do you have a site?

Gilles Retsin: No, the design is not site-specific. You can basically pop it up where you want. We will have to choose one site, but it is not designed for a specific location.

Amy Frearson: When are you going to start?

Gilles Retsin: We are hoping to have the first prototype out in the summer. An actual built prototype as a finished commercial product will probably take longer than a year to fully develop.

ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design

Above: ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design, which will the first 3D printed house if built this summer as planned.

Amy Frearson: How long will it take to build?

Gilles Retsin: On the current machines it would take up to three weeks to have all the pieces fabricated. Assembly on site is a one-day job, if the site is prepared before hand.

The building is designed to be in pieces so you don’t need any bolting, screwing, or welding on site. Imagine a Velcro or button-like connection. The pieces are extremely light, and they just kind of click together so you don’t need any other material.

Amy Frearson: How viable is 3D printing as a building method?

Gilles Retsin: When we started this research, this was a kind of science fiction. Everyone on the architecture scene was saying ‘you guys are doing science fiction and it’s only going to be possible in 50 or 60 years’.

But then when we were sitting at the table in front of one of these 3D printing companies, these guys were like ‘yeah, no problem, let’s start up the research, let’s push it’. They were asking us ‘what do you think, could it take five years or ten years to come on the market?’ So it’s not actually that far off any more.

The big difference between 3D printing and manufacturing on site is you skip the fabrication part. You don’t need people on site to handle something, you don’t need transport, and it’s mainly the actual printing of objects that is probably going to be, for a few years, still more expensive than a normal mass-produced product.

The big difference is that you can skip the entire art of constructing on site. The construction happens on the computer, in the design, and it prints out assembled. So you skip a large part.

Amy Frearson: Is it affordable compared to traditional construction methods?

Gilles Retsin: The price of 3D printing is still a big problem for large volumes. You pay for the amount of material used and not for the volume of material. We’ve developed a method that can generate extremely thin and extremely porous structures. So we can make a large volume without using a lot of material, and that’s actually something that is completely unique to 3D printing.

It’s only now with 3D printing that you can achieve a strong structure which is fibrous. This fibre structure basically wraps it up using less material than a normal structure. That makes it cheaper again.

Amy Frearson: How do you reduce the amount of material without reducing structural integrity?

Gilles Retsin: We have a process called structure optimisation, which means you go through a series of operations that make your structure more feasible. And more feasible means less material. So you’re aiming to use the smallest amount of material to achieve the strongest structure. And if you push that through to the extreme – if you keep optimising, optimising – you get something that is extremely fibrous; extremely thin.

Until now no one has managed to actually build this kind of structure because it’s impossible with current manufacturing methods. It’s only with 3D printing that you can actually achieve that kind of highly optimised structure.

Amy Frearson: Are 3D printers big enough to produce larger buildings?

3D printing technology is getting exponentially cheaper, and the machines are growing in size. In Germany there’s a company called Voxeljet and these guys have a 3D printer which can print out structures between two and four metres. There is Materialise in Belgium who have printers which are printing between two or more metres I think.

Right now they are only two or more metres because there’s no demand for bigger printers. But the printers are scalable.

The Landscape House by Universe Architecture

Above: Softkill are racing against Dutch architects Universe Architecture who hope their Landscape House, unveiled last month, will be the first 3D printed house.

Amy Frearson: Universe Architecture are planning to 3D print a house too. What do you think of that project?

Gilles Retsin: We actually don’t even consider that a 3D printed building because he is 3D printing formwork and then pours concrete into the form. So it’s not that the actual building is 3D printed.

Amy Frearson: Fosters + Partners recently announced plans to 3D print lunar dwellings.

Gilles Retsin: Yes, that’s another precedent. They’re using a similar kind of technology to Enrico Dini. So that’s one of these printers that deposits material. In their case it’s moon dust, whereas on Earth they are using sand.

If you’re making something on the moon, it makes sense that you transport a printer to the site and use the materials available on the site to build a specific structure. And your printer will be bigger than your building but that’s kind of feasible because you’re in this really extreme situation where it’s necessary to have a big printer and to use only the materials that are immediately surrounding.

3D printed lunar dwellings by Foster + Partners

Above: last month Foster + Partners announced plans to 3D print lunar dwellings.

The thing is that on Earth the situation is completely different. It’s much more about how quick you can build something and it’s much more about a kind of freedom that you want to embed in the printing. So that’s why it makes more sense to print in a factory off site. The printers that you use on site can only print and build something vertically. So they put one layer on one layer and build up the structure vertically whereas if you print off site you’re not operating in that vertical extreme, so you have much more design freedom.

And then, on a more technical level, the printers in the factory at the moment are much more precise. These highly fibrous structures are only 0.7 millimetres thick. It’s impossible to print those with stone, because there’s not enough structure or strength or integrity in sand. So it’s in the factory environment that you can go into stronger materials like plastics or metals.

The post 3D printed houses are
“not that far off”
appeared first on Dezeen.

3D printed plastic house will be assembled “in a day”

News: London architecture collective Softkill Design has joined the race to build the world’s first 3D printed house, announcing plans for a plastic dwelling that could be built off-site in three weeks and assembled in a single day.

ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design

Above and top: ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design

“It will hopefully be the first actual 3D printed house on site,” said Gilles Retsin of Softkill Design. “We are hoping to have the first prototype out in the summer.”

The single-storey Protohouse 2.0 will be eight metres wide and four metres long and will be printed in sections in a factory. The parts will be small enough to be transported in vans and then snapped together on site.

“It would take up to three weeks to have all the pieces fabricated,” said Retsin. “Assembly on site is a one-day job, if the site is prepared before hand.”

“You don’t need any bolting, screwing, or welding on site,” he added. “Imagine a Velcro or button-like connection. The pieces are extremely light, and they just kind of click together so you don’t need any other material.”

A rival 3D printed house project by Dutch studio Universe Architecture was announced earlier this year, but Gilles dismissed its claims. “We actually don’t even consider that a 3D printed building because he is 3D printing formwork and then pouring concrete into the form,” Retsin said. “So it’s not that the actual building is 3D printed.”

Softkill Design’s proposal is a development of an earlier prototype printed house unveiled at the 3D Print Show in London last October. Instead of solid walls, the original Protohouse featured a fibrous nylon structure based on bone growth.

ProtoHouse by Softkill Design

Above: ProtoHouse 1.0 by Softkill Design

The organic, fibrous form of the prototype led Dezeen readers to compare it to “a dinosaur head made of spaghetti” and “a giant spider cave“.

Protohouse 2.0 takes the same approach, with plastic material deposited only where it is needed. “You’re aiming to use the smallest amount of material to achieve the strongest structure,” Retsin explained. And if you push that through to the extreme  you get something that is extremely fibrous and extremely thin.”

ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design

Components for the Protohouse 2.0 will be fabricated in laser-sintered bioplastic at existing 3D printing facilities. This method provides better quality and structural integrity than printing on site using traditional materials such as sand or concrete, Retsin believes.

“The printers that you use on site can only print and build something vertically,” he said. “So they put one layer on one layer and build up the structure vertically whereas if you print off site you’re not operating in that vertical extreme, so you have much more design freedom.”

“These highly fibrous structures are only 0.7 millimetres thick,” he added. “It’s impossible to print those with stone, because there’s not enough structure or strength or integrity in sand. In the factory environment you can go into stronger materials like plastics or metals.”

ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design

The build cost of the Protohouse 2.0 is confidential, but Retsin said: “The cost balance of material, time, and logistics in a growing industry means the cost of the Protohouse could be a viable competitor to traditional means of manufacture and build in the relatively near future.”

ProtoHouse 2.0 by Softkill Design

In an earlier conversation, Retsin’s colleague Aaron Silver told Dezeen that the trend for 3D-printed building is likely to continue. “I think there really is an interesting future for architecture and 3D printing,” he said. “You have great cost savings, material efficiency, things like that, which architects are vastly interested in.”

See more stories about 3D printing, including our interview with Universe Architecture’s Janjaap Ruijssenaars.

Here’s some information from Softkill Design:


Protohouse 2.0

Softkill Design, a London based design collective, is working on a second, market-friendly version of the Protohouse.

The Protohouse 1.0 was developed as a research project at the Architectural Association’s Design Research Lab, Robert Stuart Smith Studio, and was supported by Materialise. The project is the first to prototype an entirely 3d printed building, including facade, curtains and finishes. Softkill’s main objective is to move away from the heavy, compression based printing of on-site buildings, instead proposing lightweight, high-resolution, optimized structures which, at life scale, are manageable truck-sized pieces that can be printed off site and later assembled on site.

Building upon the previous research, the new Protohouse 2.0 is an entirely 3d printed, one-storey, 4x 8m building. It consists of 7 big chunks of laser-sintered plastic, which can be transported to site in a small van. On site, the chunks are designed for assembly and can be fitted without screws or adhesive material within half a day. The hard building structure of the chunks continuously transitions into 3d printed curtain-like material.

In contrast to existing precedents in 3d printing buildings, which all make use of sand or concrete, Softkill has focused it’s research on lightweight materials such as bio-plastics. This generates buildings with a previously unseen level of detail, and opens up the possibility of printing all architectural elements, such as structure, furniture, stairs and facade, in one instance.

Instead of building on-site, where there is always the need of a 3d printer larger than the actual building, Softkill’s Protohouse is manufactured off-site in a factory environment with highly precise and fast 3d printers. A consistent tectonic strategy of part-to-whole is embedded in the design process from the very beginning.

To harness the possibilities of high-resolution 3d printing, Softkill Design developed a set of algorithms which, similar to bone growth, are able to distribute material where it is needed most. This results in a materially efficient fibrous structure which is at the same time highly intricate and has an ornamental quality. Using the algorithms, Softkill can design the micro-organisation of the material, up to the scale of 0.7 mm.

The post 3D printed plastic house
will be assembled “in a day”
appeared first on Dezeen.

“We can’t draft a new world and print it out”

"We can't draft a new world and print it out"

Opinion: in this week’s column, Sam Jacob argues that instead of liberating us, 3D printing will merely “bind us even more closely to fewer and fewer corporations”.

If this is the year of anything, it’s the year of 3D-printing boosterism (even more than last year was). The overarching narrative surrounding 3D printing presents it as a liberating technology. It argues that the technology will free us from organised, centralised production of the industrial era. And it suggests that this radical break will in turn transform the political, economic and social structures that industrialisation precipitated.

There is a latent dream somewhere in this rhetoric, something like an electrified version of William Morris’ strange rural-futurist novel News From Nowhere. Morris’ protagonist goes to bed in the industrial 1890’s but mysteriously wakes into a post-revolutionary, proto-socialist nu-medievalist London.

It’s a London whose citizens craft themselves beautiful things in fulfilling equality. We imagine now, perhaps, our own sci-fi version of this utopia. A future where digital production technologies set us free. Where we are surrounded by sequentially layered self expression and customisation. Where we return, thanks to electronics and robotics, to an idealised folk-art state.

Yet of course, we’ve been on the cusp of techno-liberation before. Remember those wild, free years when the internet was young? Limitless fields of freedoms seemed to open up through the window of a squawking dialup modem. The information enclosures of Facebook, Google, Apple et al have long put paid to that sensation.

Let’s face it: 3D printing might give us a million new ways to make objects, but it is unlikely to undo our late capitalist relationship with objects. If the history of the internet is a lesson, then technology only accelerates us further towards the horizon of consumerism, deeper into the depths of digital modernity.

Think, for example, of the labour politics of 3D printing. There is something undeniably appealing (to designers) in the removal of the production process between the designer and their artifact, a shortening of the distance between their imagination and its physical product. But part of this appeal is that it shifts the value of the object toward the designer rather than the labour of production. It’s the total realisation of Ruskin’s critique of industrial capital’s division of labour, where ‘thought’ and ‘work’ are entirely estranged, where personality and invention are ringfenced by design rather than shared with production.

Inevitably it won’t be a democratic, distributed version of the technology that takes hold. It’ll be an iTuned, DRMified ecology that will bind us even more closely to fewer and fewer corporations. If we’re lucky enough to escape that fate, it will only be into the arms of a Pirate Bay of objects where we’ll find the 3D equivalents of screener films, dodgy 3D scans and partially ripped bootlegs.

Here’s another scenario, another possible version of a 3D-printed world. This one is a world that physically resembles the contents of your hard drive (if you are anything like me, that is). A world of half-completed files, a thousand drafts, weird duplicates, super high-res and hyper-compressed versions of the same file and lost aliases. A world made in the image of the detritus around the outlet of a photocopier. A world of copies with no originals. A world of undifferentiated, undetailed substance, endless landscapes of half-finished Sketchup models as though Google’s 3D warehouse had dumped itself back into the physical world. In other words, a super-proliferated Junkspace that would make even Junkspace blush.

Technology itself will not rescue us from our circumstance. We can’t draft a new world and print it out. In fact, the focus that digital design places on the object itself as an autonomous object, floating in its electronic amniotic sac, is itself a mirage of technology; a non-verbal argument about the nature of objects and society as much as a Fordist production line ever was.

If there is any hope of resurrecting Morris-esque resistance or Ruskinian ideology in a digital age, it is to recognise, as they did, that objects are not simply form but intrinsically politicised artifacts. And so are the technologies we use to produce them.

But 3D printing propels the idea of design-as-form to an extreme conclusion. It makes a persuasive argument for design as the production of autonomous techno-formalist objects. 3D printing might change how we make the world, but it won’t change the world itself.

The post “We can’t draft a new world and print it out” appeared first on Dezeen.

Foster + Partners to 3D print buildings on the moon

News: Foster + Partners is exploring the possibilities of 3D printing buildings on the moon using lunar soil.

The London architecture firm is working with the European Space Agency to investigate methods for constructing lunar homes and has designed a four-person residence that would shelter its inhabitants from dramatically changing temperatures, meteorites and gamma radiation.

Foster + Partners to 3D print buildings on the moon

The base of the house would be unpacked from a modular tube and an inflatable dome would fold up over it. Layers of lunar soil, known as regolith, would then be built up around the frame using a robot-operated D-Shape printer, creating a lightweight foam-like formation that is derived from biological structures commonly found in nature.

“As a practice, we are used to designing for extreme climates on earth and exploiting the environmental benefits of using local, sustainable materials,” said Foster + Partners partner and specialist Xavier De Kestelier. “Our lunar habitation follows a similar logic. It has been a fascinating and unique design process, which has been driven by the possibilities inherent in the material.”

Foster + Partners to 3D print buildings on the moon

The architects have used simulated matter to build a 1.5 tonne mockup of the structure and have also tested smaller models inside a vacuum chamber. They hope to construct the first structure at the moon’s south pole, where it will be subjected to perpetual sunlight.

Led by architect Norman Foster, Foster + Partners has also recently won a competition to renovate the New York Public Library flagship and are working on a 200-metre skyscraper for Lehman Brothers Holdings.

Recent completed projects by the firm include the McLaren Production Centre in the UK and the Spaceport America space terminal in New Mexico. See more architecture by Foster + Partners.

3D printing has been in the news a lot recently, with a boom in demand for 3D-printed sex toys, the race to be first to print an entire building, 3D-printed outfits on the catwalk at Paris Fashion Week and sweet-dispensers with 3D-printed heads.

See more stories about 3D printing »

The post Foster + Partners to 3D print
buildings on the moon
appeared first on Dezeen.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

Toronto studio Hot Pop Factory has customised Pez sweet dispensers with 3D-printed heads of customers to replace the usual cartoon characters.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

The designers used a Kinect motion-sensor to scan each subject, added the connection to the dispenser using 3D software and reproduced the heads on a plastic-printing desktop machine.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

Having removed the busts of Disney princesses from 32 Pez dispensers, the designers simply snapped the replacements on top.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

“A client asked us to come up with a fun 3D-printed holiday gift for each of their employees so we decided to remix the human body to create personalized Pez dispenser heads,” they say.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

Austrian confectionary brand Pez began placing heads on top of its refillable tablet dispensers in 1955, with early characters including Santa Claus and Mickey Mouse.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

Hot Pop Factory was founded by architecture graduates Matt Compeau and Bi-Ying Miao to make 3D-printed jewellery from their ideas that were “too complex, expensive, impractical or just too wild to construct into buildings.”

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

3D printing has been in the news a lot this week, with a boom in demand for 3D-printed sex toys, the race to be first to print an entire building, 3D-printed outfits on the catwalk at Paris Fashion Week and Nokia becoming the “first global company to embrace open design”.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

We also recently reported on 3D photo booths that allow users to print a model of their own head or miniature models of their whole body.

Pez Hacking by Hot Pop Factory

See all our stories about 3D printing »

The post Pez Hacking by
Hot Pop Factory
appeared first on Dezeen.

Architect explains how he will 3D print a "whole building in one go"

Following our story about plans for a 3D-printed house, Universe Architecture’s Janjaap Ruijssenaars tells us about the race to be first to print an entire building (+ interview + slideshow).

3D printed house interview

Ben Hobson: Our post about your plans to 3D print an entire house is one of the most popular stories we’ve ever published. Tell us about the Landscape House.

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: In 2009 we [Universe Architecture] entered a competition for a beautiful location in Belwell, on the western coast of Ireland. The location was so beautiful that we thought, if you brought traditional architecture here, then you’re going to make a cut in the landscape. So our question was: “can you make a building like landscape?”

Our answer to that question was to create a continuous structure that doesn’t have a beginning and doesn’t have an end. We got a strip of paper and tried to fold it and bend it and see if we could make a structure that is endless in itself. By turning and twisting we got on to the Möbius band principal.

We didn’t win the competition, but I thought the idea was so strong that I proceeded [to develop the design] and approached people that could help me.

Ben Hobson: And one of those people was Enrico Dini, who invented the D-Shape printer [the world’s largest 3D printer]?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: Yes, that’s an important connection. We had been trying different materials to make a small model of the house – we tried to use lead as well as paper – but the only way to make it was with a 3D printer. Having this model in our hands we thought, “why not take it to the next level and see if this principal works on a larger scale?”

3D printed house interview

Ben Hobson: So you had the concept, and the only way you could realise that was to use 3D printing. Is that right?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: Yes, that’s the chronology. We started off with the landscape and then the right technique seemed to be 3D printing.

Ben Hobson: Tell me a bit about the D-Shape printer.

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: Enrico has dedicated his life to make the biggest 3D printer he can, so he can print the biggest structures possible. So really it is his ambition that makes Landscape House possible. It uses ground-up rock or sand that is put into the printer and then hardened by adding a [binding agent].

3D printed house interview

Ben Hobson: So it’s a kind of artificial sandstone? Does it have a similar texture?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: In 2D printing you have pixels, with 3D printing you have voxels. The voxels that Enrico’s machine produces are five millimetres high, wide and deep. You can think of them as small cubes. So this will influence the texture on the outside of the building.

Ben Hobson: So the 3D-printed parts will provide the finish for the walls of the building?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: Everything that is printed will be seen in the end product. The curved walls at the ends, even the stairs inside; everything you see that is not transparent will be out of the printer.

3D printed house interview

Ben Hobson: And will you need to treat that material in any way?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: Inside we will polish it, but outside we will probably keep it as it is. We’re really interested to show the material that is printed.

Ben Hobson: And is the material structurally sound?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: What Dini proposed for this house was to not print the whole floor, or ceiling, for example, but to print the outside shape of the floor or ceiling. So what you get is a hollow structure in which we put reinforced concrete. You can have a beam as well as a column when you do this.

Before our Landscape House design, you could easily use the printer to print columns that go up vertically. But it was not possible to print something that has a horizontal connection, like a beam. By putting reinforced concrete within a hollow 3D-printed structure you can have a vertical load on top of a horizontal structure. And that opens the door for all types of designs. That was Enrico Dini’s idea.

3D printed house interview

Ben Hobson: Couldn’t you have used traditional construction methods to build this house? Why use 3D printing?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: One important thing is the endlessness of it: you work from bottom to top and there’s no beginning and no end. But maybe even more important is the fact that the shape is already in the computer and you can print the complex forms, the twists and the turns of the stairs, for example, directly as you designed it.

In the traditional way of building [with concrete] you have to make timber moulds which you will later take away again. But it’s very complex with these curves to make moulds that you fill with concrete and then remove – that’s an enormous effort.

Ben Hobson: So explain the construction process. As I understand it, the house will be built in 3D-printed segments that slot together.

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: That’s where we stood last week. That’s a process the [D-Shape] printer in Italy can handle now. But within the media there have been some reactions to the fact it’s in pieces and it’s not one print.

So now we’re also exploring the possibility of the printer following the direction of the house. The printer would go around a few hundred times, and basically print it in one go. That’s my ambition because then it would be continuous, from bottom to top. And I think it’s possible.

To print it in a few large pieces and then put it together is a very important step because you can still print the curves and the stairs. You can print [those complex sections] in one go. But to make the whole building in one go would be even more true to the idea behind the design.

3D printed house interview

Ben Hobson: And what ramifications will the use of 3D-printed parts have on the rest of the construction process?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: Traditional things like “how do you make a large span?” will remain the same; gravity will work in the same way. But it’s interesting to see how traditional [construction] techniques and these new [3D printing] techniques will work together. For example, the printed parts can incorporate space for the plumbing, or the electricity.

Ben Hobson: And where are you now with the project? When will construction start?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: The ambition is to start at the beginning of next year [2014], but we don’t have a commission that’s fixed at this moment. There’s interest from Brazil to construct a residential centre for a large national park, a few hours away from San Paulo. We’re looking into how serious that is.

3D printed house interview

Above: basement floor plan – click for larger image

Ben Hobson: Assuming you find a client, how much will it cost?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: My estimation is around five million Euros. But this depends on many things: what country, what site, things like that.

Ben Hobson: And how long would construction take?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: The estimated time for the printed parts is over half a year. So construction will probably take between half a year and a year.

3D printed house interview

Above: ground floor plan – click for larger image

Ben Hobson: So the speed of the printer is the main thing that slows you down?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: If we continue doing research then we’ll get the building time sharper than that. One option for this house [rather than using a 3D printer] would be to bend steel like you would with the bow of a ship. Then you could have everything pre-fabricated and maybe build it within six months. But I think eventually 3D printing will be competitive.

Ben Hobson: Are there any other architecture firms looking to use 3D printing to build a house?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: We would be first. There is a Dutch company called DUS Architects and they have the ambition of printing a house. I don’t want to offend them, but in my opinion Enrico Dini is the only person who can print a true building at this stage, and he’s sure that this would be the first.

3D printed house interview

Above: first floor plan

Ben Hobson: And where can this technology go? In the future will buildings be constructed, or part-constructed, using 3D printing?

Janjaap Ruijssenaars: I think it has great potential, but it has to be the best way of constructing [for any given project]. The design has to really relate to the technique, or have specific features that can only be done by a 3D printer. For Landscape House, 3D printing is nice because it relates so much to the design.

3D printed house interview

Above: long section – click for larger image

See all our stories about 3D printing »

The post Architect explains how he will 3D print
a “whole building in one go”
appeared first on Dezeen.

Nokia is "first global company to embrace open design"

Nokia embraces open design

News: Nokia has become the first major manufacturer to give consumers access to its  3D design files so they can create their own versions of products, according to open design pioneer Ronen Kadushin.

“I’m pretty sure they are first global company to have a go at open design,” said Kadushin, following last week’s news that the Finnish mobile phone brand released digital files allowing users to alter and 3D print their own shells for the Lumia 820 smartphone.

Berlin-based designer Ronen Kadushin, who has been making open design templates freely available for download since 2005, says Nokia’s move is timely.

“I think they did it because they are in a business situation that pushes them to try this new model – not to make money, but to focus their brand identity as up-to-date and in tune with the 3D printing and maker culture,” Kadushin told Dezeen.

However, Kadushin doubts that Nokia will be able to control who downloads and uses their templates. “You have to register as a developer to download the files, but tomorrow it [will be] on The Pirate Bay for anyone to download anonymously,” he said. “But in any case, they will create a community of developers that will generate designs, new ideas, solutions and creativity.”

According to Wikipedia, open design is “the development of physical products, machines and systems through use of publicly shared design information”. Enthusiasts see it as an alternative to the “closed” product development model employed by major brands, that jealously guard their intellectual property.

Electronics company Teenage Engineering began offering replacement parts for its synthesisers as downloadable 3D print files last year, but Nokia is the first major manufacturer to allow users access to its designs.

Nokia embraces open design

Last April, Domus editor Joseph Grima talked about the birth of “the era of open design”. In an interview with Dezeen, Grima said: “More and more design is resonating with the spirit of the social media era where it’s much more about sharing ideas, collaborating, being completely transparent, completely open, rather than the secretive model of the past.”

Grima curated an exhibition in Milan last year called The Future in The Making: Open Design Archipelago, which explored how designers were harnessing digital design and manufacturing technologies to share information and manufacture products without having to rely of large-scale industry or major brands.

Dezeen’s editor-in-chief Marcus Fairs interviewed Kadushin during Vienna Design Week last year, where he warned that 3D printers could soon enable people to print ammunition for an army.

Kadushin also discussed open in a video filmed at the launch of a book on the subject in Berlin in 2011.

The book, called Open Design Now, claims that design is “undergoing a revolution” thanks to new technologies like 3D printers and accessible software.

“Anyone can be a designer today,” the book adds. “Professionals and enthusiastic amateurs alike are using open design – the creation of products using publicly available blueprints and instructions – to share their work with the world. Consumers are designing cars, restaurants, even prosthetic legs.”

Kadushin’s previous open-source products including a contraceptive device made from a copper coin and a mallet for smashing up iPhones – see all designs by Ronen Kadushin.

See all stories about open design »
See all stories about 3D printing »

The post Nokia is “first global company to embrace open design” appeared first on Dezeen.