SRSemenza said:
I am just guessing, that 3D for production of plastic parts is probably not the fastest or most cost effective.
You are correct because 3D printing was never meant to be a production method for quantities larger than 10-15 items. The reason it came into being was it was to be a replacement for the traditional methods used for rapid prototyping. Prior to that, prototyping was done exclusively on traditional machine tools, knee mills, lathes, shapers, surface grinders et al. Check out some of Darcy's equipment, that's how engineering/manufacturing models were constructed in the formative years of our industrialization.
The only problem being, was that those methods were time intensive but more importantly operator intensive. If it took 16 hours to produce a prototype...that meant it took 16 operator hours to produce a prototype. The linkage between a prototype model and the machine operator was a direct one.
Enter 3D printing where you'd prepare the equipment, load the model config and then just walk away. Sixteen hours later you'd have a prototype that was suitable for engineering/manufacturing analysis. The machinist, in the interim, was free to work on other projects which sped other projects along.
The first in-house 3D printer I became familiar with cost $125,000 in 1996, it had the same sized foot print as the current models but it was a God-send. So it could be said that 3D printing has now progressed into an arena it was never initially designed to serve. Small quantities of manufactured product rather than limited quantities of rapid prototypes. [smile]
It's all very interesting to see how the the simple inclusion of semiconductors into manufacturing equipment has changed the manufacturing world...as well as everything else.