Affordable 3D Printing By Owen Collins Published in TD&T, Vol. 48 No. 1 (winter 2012)

Theatre Design & Technology, the journal for design and production professionals in the performing arts and entertainment industry, is published four times a year by United States Institute for Theatre Technology. For information about joining USITT or to purchase back issues of TD&T, please contact the USITT office: USITT 315 South Crouse Avenue, Suite 200 Syracuse, NY 13210 tel: 800-93-USITT (800-938-7488) tel: 315-463-6463 fax: 315-463-6525 e-mail: [email protected] web: www.usitt.org

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

AFFORDABLE Printing By Owen Collins Introduction When I was a kid I dreamed of having a replicator like the one on Star Trek. The idea of having something on hand that could just create what you wanted, right in front of you, was such appealing science fiction. This was especially true once I began studying design. I have always loved the process of creating the design: sharpening my pencil, squaring and taping down the vellum, cutting Bristol board model pieces, stretching the watercolor paper. This nostalgia for analog techniques is balanced with an appreciation for how technology can express ideas more efficiently. As we all have found, there is never enough time, and any tools you can use to speed up your work are welcome. CAD is a great addition to a designer’s tools. Gone is the time of drawing out plates and crumpling up the paper as the design changed. Sending out a new plate is now as simple as hitting print. As I started to do more three dimensional modeling on the computer, I found myself wishing for a 3D equivalent for my handy inkjet printer. There is an equivalent. It involves an additive manufacturing technology called rapid prototyping machines or 3D printing. These “printing” machines have been around since the early 1990s, and they employ a variety of processes to make actual physical objects. My first experience with

10

theatre design

& technology

winter

2012

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

photos by the author, except as noted

Resolution comparisons of two fleur-de-lis designs: top one “printed” by a $40,000 commercial machine, and the bottom one printed by the author’s Makerbot Cupcake CNC.

one was in 1999, when the engineering department of my university purchased a rapid prototyping machine. It cost hundreds of thousands of dollars at the time. This machine created objects by gluing together layers of paper patterns. The patterns for each layer, which could be quite complicated, were cut out individually, and glue was deposited on one side of the pattern. This machine created objects that were very rough and blocky—and there were tight restrictions on who was allowed to use it—however, it was a tantalizing glimpse into an exciting world of turning 3D CAD models into physical objects. Currently, there are a number of companies in the “high-end” 3D printing market, each with slightly different capabilities. The primary ones are Objet (object.com), Stratasys/Dimension (stratasys.com), iMaterialise (i.materialise.com), and 3D Systems (3dsystems.com). They are used by a variety of engineers, architects, designers, and inventors to create physical prototypes of computer models. The high-end rapid prototyping machines have the highest resolution possible and can create objects in layers that measure in the thousandths of a millimeter. Some entertainment industry companies and museums have taken advantage of 3D printing.

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

winter

2012

theatre design

& technology

11

Printed Queen Ann furniture, 1/2˝ scale, showing segmentation possible with curves in STL files.

The exhibit Tutankhamun and the Golden Age of the Pharaohs in Discovery Times Square in New York featured a mummy that was created out of UV-cured resin by a high-resolution iMaterialise 3D printer. The 2009 fantasy/horror stopmotion film, Coraline, featured faces and other 3D printed parts. A press release by Object, the company that partnered with the film-makers, claimed that this was “the first use of 3D printed replacement faces in a feature-length film.” The company went on to describe the benefits of using their technology. “The character of Coraline had the potential to exhibit well over 208,000 facial expressions. By comparison, the main character in the 1993 stop-motion film The Nightmare Before Christmas—by the same director—had but 800 possible expressions, and was considered a breakthrough in animation in its day.” The technology of 3D printing has come a long way from the layered-paper machine I saw back in 1999. However, with prices for the equipment ranging from $10,000 to $100,000, high-end prototyping is still out of reach for most theatre organization. But there are less expensive options. Four years ago, people began developing low-cost alternatives to the professional machines. The trade-off in cost, however, was that they required a huge time commitment and a lot of knowledge of electrical and mechanical engineering to keep them running. But the technology kept improving. In 2009, Makerbot Industries (makerbot.com) announced it was selling a kit for hobbyists to build their own 3D printer for less than $1,000. I immediately bought one of their first kits. It seemed like I was finally going to realize my science fiction dreams.

The Technology Hobbyist printer kits use Fused Disposition Modeling (FDM) to build up an object. This type of additive manufacturing uses heated plastic that is pushed out of an extruder moving in a pattern controlled by the computer. It is basically a computer-controlled hot glue gun, except that the extruded plastic in these 3D printers is thinner than the lead of a mechanical pencil. As the pattern for one layer is done, the extruder moves a notch higher and lays down more plastic on top of the previous layer. It continues, layer by layer, to create the object. Each layer is a fraction of a millimeter. The height of the layers is a defining factor in the resolution of the printer. 3D printers commonly work with computer files in the STL format. It’s a file format native to stereolithography CAD software developed by 3D Systems. STL files, which can be exported by many of the standard modeling and CAD programs, describe the surface geometry of an object in triangulated facets. This technique is very versatile and can represent complex organic shapes like faces or simpler geometric shapes. Increasing the resolution settings when exporting increases the number of triangle segments, which produces smoother looking curves. The smoothness of curved surfaces in the Z plane (height) is determined by the thickness of the plastic in each layer. There are a couple of steps to follow to get your design ready for the 3D printer. After creating your 3D model on the computer, you must first save it to the STL file format. Then you need to use a “slicing” program to calculate the path that the tool will use to build the object. This path is described in the G-Code scripting language. The printer uses this very specific G-code to instruct its motors to move the correct amount and push out the correct amount of plastic. It is not a good idea

12

theatre design

& technology

winter

2012

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

to use the G-code from someone else. There is no guarantee that it will accurately create an object on your machine.

Affordable Options When I purchased my kit, the Makerbot Cupcake CNC (this particular model is now discontinued), there were no other companies selling kits to build printers. Now there are several options in the low-end 3D printing market. You can either purchase a build-it-yourself kit, build one yourself using free plans available on the Internet, or utilize services that offer 3D printing. There are some midrange models as well that can be purchased fully assembled. The least expensive option is creating a printer using the open-source designs that are currently available. Open source is a philosophy and practice based on sharing all the information on design, creation, and execution of a creative work (see opensource.org for more information). The primary open-source 3D printing project is the RepRap project. Started by Adrian Bowyer of Bath University in England, the eventual goal of the project is to design a machine that can fabricate all of the parts necessary to build another copy of itself. The idea is that if every machine can create the parts for another machine, then those printers can print parts for more printers, creating an exponential growth pattern that could rival that of rabbits. Since part of the philosophy behind the RepRap project is to freely share knowledge, all of the plans are easily available. The cost of these machines is in the range of $600-900, depending on whether parts are purchased separately, sometimes in bulk, or a whether a ready-to-assemble kit of hardware is purchased. There are small companies that specialize in selling bundles of the related hardware and electronics needed to build a machine. This option involves a much larger time commitment and more knowledge of electronics and mechanics. They have more variables in the construction, but with the investment of time, these machines can produce prints that are equal to all the models mentioned. A downside is that you really would have to know how to “tune” the machine. Another downside is that there is no customer support for a machine like this. While there is a large supportive community of “reprappers” who would answer your questions, quite a bit of searching through forums is often required to find the right answer. And, there is rarely a consensus among reprappers on how things should be done. In forums and IRC chats there are conflicting thoughts and opinions on how to troubleshoot issues. You must be willing to research and evaluate the sources of opinions in order to make informed choices. One step up from the complete do-it-yourself project is a hobbyist 3D printer kit. Makerbot Industries LLC (makerbot.com), MakerGear LLC (makergear.com), and Ultimaking LTD (ultimaker. com) are currently the prominent companies catering to this new market of 3D printing hobbyists.

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

winter

2012

An example of a complex 3D object: the seven-inch-tall “Talking Head of Stephen Colbert.”

theatre design

& technology

13

The Replicator printer by MakerBot and a few of the company’s favorite prints. It’s a more recent version of the author’s printer. Photo courtesy MakerBot Industries.

3D printers are well-suited for testing design iterations, for example, this knee joint for a puppet.

14

theatre design

& technology

winter

2012

Makerbot Industries is a Brooklyn, New York, company founded in 2009 that focuses on producing “an open-source 3D printer to democratize manufacturing.” Makerbot has three 3D printers: first the Cupcake CNC, then the Thing-O-Matic, and now the Replicator. A pioneer in the DIY market, they are the main company focused on supporting both hardware and software for their equipment. MakerGear is a company from Shaker Heights, Ohio, that began selling parts for printers in 2009. Now they have designed their own printer called the Mosaic. The Mosaic has only recently become available, and initial responses have been very positive. The third company, Ultimaking, was founded in 2011 in the Netherlands. Their printer, the Ultimaker, was released in the summer of 2011. It has faster print speeds and a larger build area than both the Replicator and the Mosaic. There are similarities among these companies. All of their products (Mosaic, Replicator, Ultimaker) are characterized by laser-cut plywood cases, they use the same types of plastic feedstock, and all focus on FDM additive manufacturing. The companies follow the opensource ethos and share their plans online. However, they do so usually only after the product is released and sold. They all profess to welcome competition and work to make their kits easy to build and their instructions easy to understand. Companies who make and sell low-end 3D printer kits also believe in the value of assembling it yourself. Makerbot founder Bre Pettis said, “You wouldn’t buy a hot rod if you didn’t plan on learning how to change the oil. It’s similar for the MakerBot. Putting together a MakerBot teaches you how it works and makes it so that you’re comfortable doing some maintenance.” I found this to be very true. Before assembling my Cupcake CNC kit, I was previously unfamiliar with CNC-controlled machines and 3D printers. Afterwards, I was able to troubleshoot problems that arose and was unafraid to disassemble the machine to tweak it.

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

Objects can be totally solid, hollow, or any percentage in between. The more solid an object is, the longer it takes to print. Most objects can be very strong and structural at fifty percent or even thirty percent solidity. The assembly process was a little tricky but not any harder than installing and setting up a lighting or sound system. It took twenty-five hours of setup, assembly, and calibration spread out over a month before I was ready to print. The main advantage of buying a kit from one of these companies is the clear assembly documentation and, more importantly, support for hardware questions and concerns. Any questions that I had that couldn’t be answered by a quick online search or query to the e-mail list was answered by MBI’s support staff. So far, Makerbot is the only company that has a support system with dedicated support personnel. Only Makerbot and MakerGear have Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) sheets available for the plastic they sell, which is necessary if using in a workplace or educational environment—and advisable for everyone else. Makerbot is currently the only kit manufacturer that has software engineers actively supporting the controlling software. Both MakerGear and Ultimaking rely on existing open-source software. Makerbot’s controlling software, ReplicatorG, is a free download and runs on Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux.

Usage My experience with 3D printing is predominately with Makerbot products, so my evaluation is focused on them. Their kit has online documentation, as mentioned, that is well organized and illustrated. While there were some questions that came up in the construction, they were easily answered by the e-mail list or Makerbot support. The software I use is an open-source application called ReplicatorG (replicat.org). Installation was easy, just like installing a regular piece of software on your computer. (Other open-source applications can involve using the command line or installing external libraries.) While the ReplicatorG user interface has some deviations from the norm, it is well laid out and functional. In addition to controlling the printer and converting STL files into G-code, it also has basic functions to manipulate the size and placement of your STL files. 3D printers are precise, but they do take time to build up an object, layer by layer. Fortunately, once you monitor printing of the first layer, it is mostly hands off, allowing you to continue working on other tasks. The amount of time it takes to print an object primarily depends on its size and complexity, but there are other factors that can affect the print time. Two variables are decided when the G-code generator (e.g., ReplicatorG) is run: the layer height, which equals resolution vertically, and the percentage of solidity. Objects can be totally solid, hollow, or any percentage in between. The more solid an object is, the longer it takes to print. Most objects can be very strong and structural at fifty percent or even thirty percent solidity. Objects created with 3D printers can be just about any shape. But there are some limitations. Consider, for example, an hour glass shape. Printing the bottom half involves successively layering up smaller circles to form a cone. The top half requires layers of successively larger circles. Such overhangs in the design are problematic because the molten plastic has to extend past its supporting layer. This is most problematic with angles of more than forty-five degrees. The new layer doesn’t have enough material to rest on from the previous layer, and it sags or droops. High-end 3D printing techniques have a dissolvable or removable material to support overhangs in the model. Less-expensive open-source machines can also have breakaway support material as long as it’s the same material as the model itself. This allows more complex shapes, but cleaning the support material off the model is difficult and can damage delicate shapes. I found changing the orientation of the model to avoid overhangs, or breaking it up into parts can get rid of the need for support material altogether. MakerBot is currently working on a water-soluble support material, but it is not yet available.

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

winter

2012

theatre design

& technology

15

Other Options

Scaling 3D objects is easy. Shown here, the same hand in two sizes.

Some printers can be purchased preassembled, for a higher price. MakerGear and Makerbot both offer preassembled versions of their printers. Other companies offer fully assembled printers. Bits From Bytes (bitsfrombytes.com), a British company, offers their 3DTouch printer starting at around $3,000. There is also a Chinese company, Personal Portable 3D Printer (pp3dp.com), which sells their UP! 3D printer for $2,690. Both of those printers come with software that works only on Windows computers. They also are restricted to using plastic specially formulated for their machines. However, both machines require little to no assembly and very little calibration to get started. Another difference between the high-end companies and the companies targeting hobbyists is in the pricing structure of the printing material. The high-end companies have proprietary consumables, similar to branded ink cartridges. Plastics replacement cartridges cost between $140 and $250 and have a DRM chip to prevent refilling. In contrast, companies focused on the DIY market sell plastic for fifteen to twenty dollars per pound.

Using 3D Printing Services Printing services are a great way to have access to great quality 3D printers at a marginal cost. Shapeways (shapeways.com) and Ponoko (ponoko. com) are two full-service companies. However, there are a lot of printing services around, so check your local area and the Internet. Ponoko provides laser cutting and CNC routing, as well as 3D printing. In addition, they provide a marketplace for people to share designs and sell them as objects. It is like designing your own Ikea-style flat-pack piece that is shipped to the purchaser. Shapeways is a similar service but they focus solely on 3D printing. This narrower focus allows them to provide more material options at a lower cost. Both companies have fabrication facilities in multiple countries, so shipping can vary depending on where it is

16

theatre design

& technology

winter

2012

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

being made and your location. Both companies require you to register for their services. Once signed in, you can upload a design of your own or choose a design from their marketplace to get printed. The cost of printing depends on the type of material chosen. Each service checks the uploaded files for problems, and I found them equally effective. They both found the same problem with a model that was not “watertight.” This refers to an object that isn’t fully closed. Most printing software will have problems resolving what is the inside and what is the outside of such a model. The ReplicatorG software found the same problem but was able to ignore it and print it anyway. Using 3D printing services is somewhat expensive for larger items. However, they can be ideal for creating unique small decorative items. Custom jewelry, for instance, can be modeled on your computer and uploaded. These services can print objects out of metal, and they are ready to go. Or, for a quarter of the price, they can be made out of plastic and finished to look like metal. A caution, however. These services assume that every shape is 100 percent solid, unlike the DIY products where you can specify what percentage of solidity you would like. That can make even small items pricey, since cost is determined on volume of material used to create the design. And, the cost of shipping can sometimes be more than the printing cost, so it pays to make multiple orders at the same time.

Analysis So, you say, all that info about 3D printers is well and good, but how does this pertain to theatre? Well, the ability to create exact scale replicas of architectural details in your scenic designs, or custom props, or custom furniture for your models—really, anything smaller than four inches—is pretty amazing. However, 3D printers are obviously not the best tool for every job. Anything larger than the build area of your printer needs to be made in pieces and glued together. Also, the time it

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

winter

2012

theatre design

& technology

17

takes to print something can be a deciding factor. Many simple model pieces like basic platforms and flats can be made just as quickly by hand. Printing model furniture, which is more complex and usually requires multiple copies, is more easily justified. Does the 3D printer actually save you time? I used my printer to make hands for puppets as an experiment. The larger hand, which had to be printed in two pieces because of its size, took three and a half hours to print. In the same amount of time I could have made a mold of a hand. Using the mold, each subsequent hand would take much less time. I also experimented with creating a head of the actor Stephen Colbert the same size I would make the head of a puppet. It had to be broken down into eight pieces and took over twenty-six and a half hours to print. However, this very long printing job only took about thirty minutes of supervision. Printing out the hands only took five minutes of supervision, which reveals the true value of the machine: it frees up your time. You can use the time the printer is working on other tasks that you wouldn’t have the freedom to do if you were creating molds and castings. Plus, it is easier to keep a stockpile of digital designs on your computer, than keeping molds in your studio or shop. The discussion of time does not include the time to create the digital model that will be printed. If you are already creating a computer model as a part of your own workflow, then no time is added. But if you are creating a piece only to print, for instance a hand for a puppet or another small prop, then this may not save you any time. How long would it take to sculpt a hand in a modeling program from scratch and then print it on a 3D printer? Would that take longer than making one out of clay and making plaster casts? There is an online resource, however, that can help eliminate the need to create computer models. Thingiverse (thingiverse.com) is a website for sharing digital design files, including lots of STL files for printing. It is hosted by Makerbot Industries. I found the files to make the Stephen

18

theatre design

& technology

winter

2012

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

Colbert head on Thingiverse, as well as a Queen Anne chair and the puppet hands. Certain cautions should be observed when using printed objects. None of the low-end plastics are food-safe. They should not be used for food or beverage containers or for appliances that go in the actors’ mouths, e.g., prosthetic teeth. Also, objects printed on these machines vary in their strength. Structural integrity depends a lot on the solidity of the piece but also how it is subjected to forces. Since the percentage of solidity is decided when the object is printed, that can be accounted for. The way forces interact with the object needs to be considered in design phase. Objects are stronger when the force is perpendicular to the layers, or grain, than when the force is applied parallel to the layers. The last variable when considering structural integrity is the temperature setting when it was constructed. Like hot glue, a hotter temperature gives the plastic a higher bonding strength between layers, which would improve the strength of the object. A lot of caution and testing are needed if you are creating structural parts with a 3D printer.

Conclusion The affordable end of 3D printing is not dead simple like your desktop printer. It involves some care and attention. But options are getting easier and better. The low end of the rapid prototyping market has finally become both easy enough to use and affordable for use in theatre and the entertainment industry. While this isn’t the cure-all for your prop and modeling needs, it is a great tool to have in your workshop. v Owen Collins is a designer and is chair of the Department of Theater and Dance at Washington and Lee University. His research focusses on the exploration and integration of new technology into theater practice. Additional images and links can be found at www.courtneycollinsstudio. com/3dprinting/

Copyright 2012 United States Institute for Theatre Technology, Inc.

winter

2012

theatre design

& technology

19