3D Fabrication: Toys or Tools?

The NYT article yesterday on rapid prototyping got me thinking about the RepRap machine, the much-lauded self-replicating robot (not entirely, but on the way there) launched a few years ago as an open-source 3D printer. Despite the potential these machines exhibit, I have yet hear about any groundbreaking innovations that they have contributed to. I have never seen one in the "flesh", but am curious about what folks were doing with these things, since the lack of a population explosion reflects that they clearly weren't only reproducing themselves.

Not surprisingly, Thingiverse, a website for sharing 3D files for printing consists primarily of toys and similar widgets. I suppose the vaunted potential of these devices has slammed up against the hard reality that plastic is a lousy sole material for a lot of things. Giving isolated communities the opportunity to create small parts at will is a great idea, but what sorts of demands can these machines meet? In terms of general hygiene, I suppose various types of combs, brushes, and utensils could be manufactured, as well as specific medical odds-and-ends. For mobility you have dustcaps and maybe some seals for moving parts, but a CNC milling-machine would give you much greater flexibility in the manufacture of small parts. I suppose the machines could be of some use producing educational materials, though teachers are quite resourceful in sourcing and improvising these.

But, as far as toys go, there is great potential in easily and rapidly reproduced small plastic parts. Exihibit A: the Duplo-BRIO train hybrid brick:



Rather than creating an entire play system, this solution hacks two commonly available children's toys to create a hybrid perfectly adapted to the end user. The lesson here is to see 3D printing not as a manufacturing revolution entirely on its own, but rather as a vibrant component within an established and effective network of manufacturing and distribution.