https://www.disneyresearch.com/project/mechanical-characters/
POST 10
physical math
https://3dprint.com/52139/3d-printed-math-manipulatives/
http://makezine.com/projects/make-42/fun-with-flexibles
math
https://sketchesoftopology.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/mathematics-with-3d-printing/
https://www.simonsfoundation.org/multimedia/3-d-printing-of-mathematical-models/
POST 9
Filaments!
http://www.esun3d.net/product.aspx?TypeId=2
http://www.filamentexpress.com/
New Stuff!
PETG (ABS alternative)
and
Nylon
by FilamentExpress
FOR Ultimaker (2.85mm)
230 degrees
NO heated base
No fan
Use blue tape on base
(50mm/sec extrude)
POST 8
We are now entering the final Phase! Please write a short post reflecting on Phase 1 and 2, and brainstorm as to how you might combine your reflections and work from each phase into your final project. Also, start working on your final project. It’s never too early!
in between phase one and two I found myself experimenting with other machines within our craft room and found much pleasure in learning how to use them. though i do wish i had the time now to truly master and possibly troubleshoot the machines. Being able to repair and understand the inner/outter workings of a machine is fairly important as it can save you time and energy at a later time. Now that our 3D printer is malfunctioning, maybe I will be able to troubleshoot and understand the printer even more than before.
Edit: Never mind @spencer fixed it. #schemefoiled
As for phase two, i came to reflect on the powerful uses of a machine like the 3D printer. With focus on education rather than manufacturing, I came to learn about the applications that makers and educators have devised to incorporate the presence of a 3D printer into a classroom. it was interesting to know that the integration of new technologies are have been oppose with few or even valid reasoning. Their is plenty of evidence showing that current practices are important but require a push forward to be much more effective than they once were.
How to combine the work from phase one and phase two?
I would like to experiment with different materials on a 3D printer ( and maybe the laster cutter) to create items that might help some one understand how items are assembled; like when creating parts of different material that will fit into each other and have different amounts of stability or use. Maybe using different material combinations on a interactive plane that encourages experimentation.
kinda like a mix and match activity, or a puzzle.
Though making a sculpture using different materials and parts might be super cool too! snap on and snap off elements to add or take from it.
of course this might be a prototype, but i would actually enjoy more than a prototype or even size limitations. I would also like to branch out to STL printers as well.
we shall see.
POST 7
Alexis Trevizo
Professor Arlene Ducao
Digital Fabrication
5 April 2016
Maker Spaces in Education
As technology has evolved, it has infiltrated every part of society.
From business spaces, to medical fields, technology has helped to advance
countless fields. One field that is currently debated, however, is the
educational space. While some believe that technology should be taught at the
youngest age possible, others are hesitant to take the next step in allowing
the maker movement to spread to the classroom.
To clarify, the maker movement is not just the embrace for 3D printers
and other computer aided design projects. The maker movement is the idea and
embrace of making anything. The definition is so broad that paper craft,
sewing, gardening or even making an ice cream sundae can be considered to be a
part of the maker movement (Martinez). What allows making an ice cream sundae a
possible entity in the maker movement is not the just the act of making the
sundae, but also the process of before and after the creation of the sundae.
Through it may seem like common knowledge, creating anything requires research
and development. A maker must then apply
what they have learned to further iterations of a project, making the next
sundae even tastier than the last.
Yet, it has been argued that our technological advancements are not
helping us evolve in all aspects of living; specifically, within the realms of
education. Many continue to believe that the education systems used today are
considered 20th or even 19th century forms of practice where
students are expected to learn by sitting and listening to an instructor and
then regurgitating lesson on exams. Rather than encouraging new ideas that feed
the technological movements of today, the education system breeds reiteration
of previous ideas. Although this is a common argument, this is not the case with
the maker movement educational institutes and work places. Instead, these
institutions are steering away from the models of the past, hoping to stimulate
creativity and innovation. In the cases with schools that implement these
alternative models, they are even adopting and implementing the ideals of the
maker movement.
Traditionally, schools allow for very little experimentation and don’t
take failure too kindly. Since success is rewarded, failure is typically deemed
as a disturbance in the learning environment. Failing in a traditional
classroom is considered to be omen or even taboo amongst parents and students alike.
Unlike a traditional setting, an education system that venerates failure, such
as the maker ideology, could better help students improve in the future. With innovations such as the 3D printer, maker
culture allows students to quickly ideate and prototype their ideas when it
comes to experimental based lesson plans that require a more hands-on approach.
However, some argue that use of a makerspace in education is simple not
feasible. One primary argument fitting under this category, is that schools,
especially public schools, simply cannot afford to have a makerspace in their
school. According to previous business models, a makerspace can cost up to
$80,000 dollars a month at most (Artisan’s Asylum, Cavalcanti). Although this
price is defined by a business motive, it still portrays how costly the maker
movement can be for small school districts hoping to implement it. The $80,000 price
tag comes from this space’s rent (which is 75% of the expense), hardware,
software, insurance, utilities, maintenance staff. What this opinion against
the use of maker spaces in schools does not take into consideration, however,
is that for schools, these expenses would already be accounted for. As for the
other expenses, many like Sylvia Martinez suggest that maker culture can be
implemented with little extra budget adjustment. In fact, Martinez even
stresses that staffing and maintenance of the space should be entirely managed
by members already employed by the school since maker culture encourages participants
to collaborate with each other. With this method, teachers would not only learn
about the new machines but also learn alongside their students.
For students, the maker culture provides access to a greater learning
experience applicable to spheres beyond the specific maker movement. The
problem solving and the research behind it can easily be applied to any
subject. For example, in a technology school in Georgia, an after school maker
space program allows students to create models for vehicles on software that
would normally not be available to students of their age. Rather than
specifically instructing the students, he allows them to explore the software.
These vehicles are then placed in testing chambers, and then raced against one
another. Regardless of whether or not the students win or lose, they are then
able to go back and redesign their cars, and test them again (Stager). This
process, commonly called the iterative process, has often been excluded out of
the classroom setting until higher education. With the maker movement, however,
the ability to quickly reiterate provides students with exposure to the
iterative process, which is not only important to STEM fields, but also to
liberal arts. Rather than testing a student’s ability to memorize, it allows
them to learn from their failure, and to benefit from the process.
Although the maker movement in schools seems perfect for schools, further
concern is shown regarding how to use maker culture within educational
institutes. In on experiment, two different groups of students were granted
time after school to use 3D printers. One group was given an end goal of
creating a method of education to help students around the world, while the
other group wasn’t tasked at all. Both groups had no prior experience with 3D printing
or the skills required to operate one. Both groups sectioned off into designers
and printers. Students from both groups began designing things to print while
others scoured the internet to learn how to use a 3D printer. The tasked group then
used different methods to add brail to items they created and designed, while
the other group focused on simple items they found or partially created, most
of these being key chains and phone cases. While the tasked group was able to
create a range of objects with brail implantations in additional sessions, the
other group continued to create items like key chains, which they would then
attempt to sell to other students.
Although both groups learned different skills in order to operate the
machines, the untasked group became a small manufacturing plant as opposed to
the other group that effectively solved a serious problem. This experiment
demonstrates how opposition about the maker movement can derive from it’s
capitalistic background. The capitalistic motivation becomes more and more
present with services such as 3D hubs or even e-commerce sites like Etsy, where
handmade objects are easily marketable. Another opposing opinion thinks of the
tools within a maker space becoming expensive toys for children to destroy and
play with. Although any parent with a young child can sympathize with this
view, this “destructive play” in the eyes of the maker movement is considered
experimentations and testing. With the freedom to play, tinker, and analyze
tools within a space; students are given the opportunity to experiment freely
while learning the function and capabilities of tools or object around them.
However, it is still important to keep in mind the direction which students may
take while learning. The tasked group was considered successful in their
efforts because they had guidance form the prompt to help direct their creativity
and still allow them to experiment with limitations in mind. Makerspaces should
not be installed without proper guidance of the students in order to create the
best learning environment possible.
Despite the arguments against maker spaces, the benefits outweigh the
conflicts presented. Maker spaces offer a better system of learning than what
is traditionally presented in schools, encourage young students to immerse
themselves in technology, and promote a creative mindset. Moreover, they give
students the opportunity to learn at a very young age what would normally be
taught decades later in their life. With the tools to learn from their mistakes
and work towards creative solutions, students exposed to maker spaces are at an
incredible advantage for not only their individual development, but also the
development of the rest of society.
Works Cited
Anderson, C. (2012). Makers:
The new industrial revolution. New York, NY: Random House.
Anderson, C. (2013, April
16). The Maker Movement: Tangible goods emerge from ones and zeros. Wired.
Retrieved from http://www.wired. com/2013/04/makermovement/.
Cavalcanti,
Gui. "Model Makerspaces: Creating a Business." Make:.
N.p., 4 June 2013. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Deloitte,
C. "Impact of The Maker Movement." Deloitte Center (n.d.):
n. pag.MakerNews. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
"Education." Maker
Faire. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Gershenfeld,
Neil. "How to Make Almost Anything: The Digital Fabrication
Revolution." Foreign Affairs 91.6 (2012): 43-57. JSTOR.
Web. 06 Apr. 2016.
Groff,
J. S. (2013). Expanding our “frames” of mind for education and the arts. Harvard
Educational Review, 83(1), 15–39.
Hatch, M. The Maker
Movement Manifesto: Rules for Innovation in the New World of Crafters, Hackers,
and Tinkerers. Print.
Jo,
Wonjin. "Introduction of 3D Printing Technology in the Classroom for
Visually Impaired Students.” Practice Report (2016): 1-8. ebscohost.
Web. 05 Apr. 2016.
"Makerbot
in the Classroom." Makerbot. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Martinez, S. and G. Stager. Invent
to Learn: Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom. Print.
Martinez,
S., and G. Stager. "The Maker Movement: A Learning Revolution."ISTE.
N.p., 21 July 2014. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Morozov,
E. "Making It." NewYorker. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Rotman,
D. "The Difference Between Makers and Manufactures."TechnologyReview.
N.p., 2 Jan. 2013. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
Stager,
G. "What's the Maker Movement and Why Should I Care?"Scholastic.
N.p., 2014. Web. 6 Apr. 2016.
POST 6
Alexis
Trevizo
Digital
Fabrication
Prof.
Arlene Ducao
03.24.16
Maker Education
To begin, I originally wanted to write
about the possible critiques that educational institutes may have on the maker
movement. Specifically the installation of expensive equipment and materials
such as desktop CNC machine and 3D printers. I wondered how they could hurt an
institute in a financial or educational manner. These thoughts and wonders came to be shortly
after I traveled to the Makerbot Manufacturing plant in Brooklyn with my
Digital Fabrication class at New York University. The words of our tour guide,
Gina, alarmed me after one of my classmates asked about their target clientele.
The targets being large manufactures, creative companies and educational
institutes. Gina had briefly mentioned that higher education institutes didn’t seem
to need a bombardment of advertising to be convinced that purchasing a Makerbot
3D printer. Yet, “lower” institutes -like middle school and elementary- need a
much firmer push. She explained that many of the schools needed further
education on the printer. Makerbot achieves this a basic education program that
shows how easy it is to use their products and thus hoping to convince schools
that purchasing a 3D printer from Makerbot is the best decision that a school
can make. When asked to elaborate on the educational program she mentioned
basic operation, Gina suggested the were teaching educators the basic functions
of the printer. However, when it came to the applications of a 3D printer she
was unclear and eluded to it being helpful with math or science in one way or
another.
To hear a higher level manager Makerbot
vaguely speak about their own products capabilities and uses in an educational
institute was rather alarming. I was in
fact uncomfortable to know that not even the manufactures didn’t know what to
do with a 3D printer ( other just print “stuff” ). This concerned me because it
seemed that Makerbot was having a hard time selling their product to the
general public. With this I walked away
from Makerbot wondering how schools felt about companies like Makerbot desperately
pressuring them to purchase 3D printers. I felt that the presence of a
corporation in a educational institute wasn’t idea for an educational system as it may force pressure schools to cut corners
in other departments. However I found
that I was only assuming that school and other institutions were concerned with
the negatives a 3D printer and the Maker Movement might bring to education.
Immediately I went to work searching for the possible criticisms in of the
Maker Movement or Maker Culture in the education system.
The search for those who apposed the
Maker Movement was rather difficult as most searches lead to the educational
benefits of the Maker Movement. I chose to ignore the results as they weren’t
quite what I was looking for. As my searches became more and more pro maker
movement I came to the sudden realization that I actually had very little
knowledge behind the educational potential the Maker Movement had to
offer. In fact, I was absolutely
clueless. I only knew about the basic functionality of a 3D printer the
additive process through the extrusion of molten plastic to create 3D “stuff”
one designs or borrows from the internet. My understanding of machine of a 3D
printer in a classroom was also very basic. As I had a hard time understanding
the educational impact a 3D printed object can have on a young student. From
what I differed was that a 3D printer was very expensive and printed thing made
of plastic in a relatively short time.
Imagined a classroom setting where a teacher would show students huddled
around a 3D printer as they watched an a outline of plastic become partial
piece of plastic just as the the school bell (to teacher) alerted them switch
activities. Thus leaving the partial piece of plastic to quietly become a bit
more interesting. It sounds cool, but
what are we to do with this new plastic object? I believe most of my thoughts
were like this simply because most of my own 3D printed objects ended in
frustration or as a stiff piece of plastic that was doomed to live on my desk
for who knows when. This made me want to
learn more about the educational uses of a 3D printer as well was the
influences that the printer has had
within the Maker Movement.
After attempting to create a prompt
form my arguments I often found myself wondering what I actually knew about the
Maker Movement. I have found myself only accepting the phrase as it is makes –HA
puns!- it way into my everyday routines through class lectures and news feeds.
It has been a phrase that has just appeared before me. Nor did have I question
the presence of the phrase or the culture behind it. I just though it was “cool”
that one can use 3D printers to make “stuff”. Luckly I have grown much more
aware of the situations before me as I further my education within the strong
emabrace of the Maker Movement.
Many assume that Maker Mvement is a phenomenon
that emerged in the late 2000s. This
however is false as the emphasis for a more hands on education can be found
through out history. Specifically the work of Seymour Papert truly focuses on
the power that an education through doing is much more effective than that of
the standard-sit-at-desk-listen system that schools have. Parpert began to
stress education through the power of doing soon after he created a set of
working gears. “ ” While reflecting on
his work, Parpert hoped that others would also be willing to work on creation
projects much like his own as it helped him learn skills that were necessary
for completing his task of recreating the gears.
With a new appeal and interest in the
Maker Movement I began to look at the research of others on the subject matter.
A book by Sylvia Martinez quickly caught my attention. Her book, Invent To Learn: Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the
Classroom the versatility of the book was quite useful
as it argued for the importance of making things and “ progressive education”
in the modern classrooms. Interestingly enough Martinez’s push and passion of a
the significance of the Maker Movement is extremely evident as her piece sounds
more like “how to integrate making in your classroom” as it is addressed to
other educators who also attempting the push for Maker Culture within their own
school and districts ( a section is even devoted to educating someone how way
to handle any and all nay-sayers of the Maker Movement!)
POST 5
The Mind and Methods of an Engineer.
Industry City
The trip to Industry City was very satisfying and was fairly eye opening.
I say "eye opening" because of the trip to Makerbot was insight to how a modern manufacturing plant may function in NYC. Simply because a corporation the size of Makerbot, usual do not have their operations somewhere that isn't as economically gripping as a place as NY as appose to an area with much lower rent( like the midwest or even China).
A facility in a different location is likely to have the entirety of the production of their products. That was not the case at Makerbot it was evident that the faculty in Brooklyn was very specific to one or two aspects of production of the 3D printer. However, It wasn't as "manufacture-y" as i thought it could have been.
I was also shocked to hear that the employees of the assembly line was always in flux as many quite their jobs due to wages and the geolocation of the plant itself.
Their building process is rather interesting and probably efficient to an extent, but what was very concerning was that our guide was a bit hesitant when it came to selling and producing for a public that didn't quite understand the fields. It felt like they were simply shoving information at people and hoping that it sticks in some way. I simply find it concerning that an industry is trying to superimpose itself to the general public I say this with public schools in mind, as Makerbot said that their main targets are large firms and educational institutes of all levels. I see that comeInstitutes are embracing the "maker movement" with open arms and are incredibly excited to begin productions of their own; I do see that the movement can cause difficulty for some lower education institutes. I find difficulty in understanding why schools are being targeted by a company such as Makerbot. I say this because I do not see the necessity of a 3D printer in a elementary schools ( though it can make sense in middle and high school, as the have finer focus on skill and career development ) as the educational use of a 3D printer is currently low. I don't see use at the moment, but I can foresee that they will be of use once development and curriculum grow to include the #d printer in the class room. I wonder if the these institutes feel ready to embrace the movement or are they being persuaded to think that they are ready by companies making theoretical uses for their products just to find more clientele
A facility in a different location is likely to have the entirety of the production of their products. That was not the case at Makerbot it was evident that the faculty in Brooklyn was very specific to one or two aspects of production of the 3D printer. However, It wasn't as "manufacture-y" as i thought it could have been.
I was also shocked to hear that the employees of the assembly line was always in flux as many quite their jobs due to wages and the geolocation of the plant itself.
Their building process is rather interesting and probably efficient to an extent, but what was very concerning was that our guide was a bit hesitant when it came to selling and producing for a public that didn't quite understand the fields. It felt like they were simply shoving information at people and hoping that it sticks in some way. I simply find it concerning that an industry is trying to superimpose itself to the general public I say this with public schools in mind, as Makerbot said that their main targets are large firms and educational institutes of all levels. I see that comeInstitutes are embracing the "maker movement" with open arms and are incredibly excited to begin productions of their own; I do see that the movement can cause difficulty for some lower education institutes. I find difficulty in understanding why schools are being targeted by a company such as Makerbot. I say this because I do not see the necessity of a 3D printer in a elementary schools ( though it can make sense in middle and high school, as the have finer focus on skill and career development ) as the educational use of a 3D printer is currently low. I don't see use at the moment, but I can foresee that they will be of use once development and curriculum grow to include the #d printer in the class room. I wonder if the these institutes feel ready to embrace the movement or are they being persuaded to think that they are ready by companies making theoretical uses for their products just to find more clientele
POST 4
Challenge:
The hanging planter that happens to also be pretty cool to look at.
Why? I would like to bring together plants and digital fabrication together in order to harmonize function (and possibly aesthetics) in an interior environment. This most due to my new interest in the botany. Why not combine it with 3D printing? Hanging planters are cool! So are sculptures!
Let's Combine These!
Possible Constraints
Now the real challenge it creating this "planter" is to make it appropriate indoor environment i.e. fabricate at a reasonable scale so that it may hang safely, but not so complicated that it makes maintaining the mechanism (or plant) a chore or a hassle of any kind. Another constraint i foresee is time to print and printer(s) use of the machines available can be an issue when multiple users are interested in 3D printing.
R+D:
After doing some research I can see that many projects of a similar nature - no pun intended - seem to be 3D printed in a single session and are rarely printed in sections. It is comforting to know that most of the projects are also designed for a range of plant and plant sizes. But other projects that tend to sprint in pieces seem to print fairly fast as they sections are usually printed in different printer at a time. It also seems that many of the projects are created in Autodesk 123D or even autoCAD. This should be interesting with my Maya background. I also looked at many kinematic sculptures and watering mechanisms people have created. I think they have likely inspired what I have brewing in my cranium.
Alexis, What are you brewing in that cranium?
I'm glad you asked distant internet view!
I am planning to make a 3D printed plant perch that is to hang from a ceiling! I aim for a medium-ish planter in parts to cut time of print and capitalizing on resources. As for innovations I will design the planter to be kinematic when it comes to watering, that and it will pretty cool to look at.
Prototyping?
02/25/16
Start on paper prototype.
iterate
Paper again!
iterate
Paper again!
iterate
Paper again!
02/26/16
Move to 3D modeling software.
Finish model.
02/27/16
print prototype sections
Iterate (as many times as necessary)
02/29/16
begin final.
Print sections 1 and 2
Print sections 3 and 4
Print secions 5 and 6
03/01/16
make adjustments
Assemble
Hang
Place plant
POST 3
POST 2
The Printer Process!
Well I 3D printed new taps for my tap shoes!!!
The process wasn't as smooth as i wanted it to be. A few issues I had was trying to figure out the dimensions of the machine as I thought that is was smaller than I anticipated. So the first few of my runs were rather small and took a long time as the default settings in Cura are set to be high quality.
The first print took 30 mins and was about 5mm in diameter. These prints were small because i assumed that the scale created in my model would be exported as well.
After a while i figured out how to use the scaling tools in Cura as they are fairly accurate with scale. I set my height to the a measurement I used in the model. The layer size was propionate to the print time and quality of the print, Since i wanted a low-res print i went with a layer of 0.20mm (max is 0.25mm). The print was 70mm X 120mm X 6mm in scale and took about 0.9 hours to finish. the hard part of the process was getting the product of of the heated plate as it got stuck and had no intension to move. i waited 10 mins to allow a cooling of the bed. the applies gentle pressure with a screwdriver to POP the product off of the bed.
time to check if the fit!
For Future Users:
Remember the scale and detail of your print as it may help the process be more efficient.
ALWAYS CHECK YOUR SETTINGS BEFORE SAVING G-CODE AND STARTING YOUR PRINT!!
No trial is the same. make sure you have plenty of time to troubleshoot when needed.
POST 1
#Ulitmaker #2
Though I have some experience with 3D printing, I have decided to tackle the printers we have at NYU since they tend to break often and need a further understanding to be properly troubleshooted. ALSO it is pretty fun!
Communities!
The technology of 3D printing is still farily young have as an incredible amount of followers and such related peoples. As the Ultimaker 2 is an Open Source machine it has one of the largest forum and community built around it.
https://ultimaker.com/en/community
https://www.thingiverse.com/
Features!
Bulid Volume:
8.8 X 8.0 X 9.0
A Cute LED Screen
Fused Filament Fabrication
One Extruder with a Max. Resolution of 20 Microns
SD Card Slot
ABS and PLA Supported
Specs!
Other Popular 3D Printers!
Makerbot ______
Formlabs Form 1+ ( this a resin printer!!)
XYZprinting Nobel 1.0 ( Another resin printer)
HOW DOES A 3D PRINTER WORK??
Glossary!
https://ultimaker.com/en/tips-tricks/11720-terminology
No comments:
Post a Comment