The next and last industrial revolution?

Citation

Corney, J. (2005), "The next and last industrial revolution?", Assembly Automation, Vol. 25 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/aa.2005.03325daa.002

The next and last industrial revolution?

The next and last industrial revolution?

Keywords: Rapid prototyping

When a new technology arrives its first market is often as an upgrade to an existing product: iPods^© are like Walkmen^© without tapes and early CAD systems were like drawing boards without paper. The same as you already have, only better.

However, a really transforming technology goes beyond simple replacement and can eventually render their original “purpose” a niche application. For example, iPods^© are so changing the nature of music ownership and retail that physical media like CDs are fast becoming redundant. The same trend is observable with CAD systems as they developed from 2D to 3D and then enabled a plethora of layered manufacturing systems that could, in the foreseeable future, render their original purpose (the creation of engineering drawings) a historical curiosity.

Will a similar cycle of replacement and transformation eventually undermine the original purpose of rapid prototyping (RP) technologies? It is interesting to speculate how this might happen.

Current RP systems are largely single-material, single- process systems. In other words they use a single type of forming operation to melt, glue or solidify a single type of material into stacks of layers that eventually form a shape.

One material is fine for the creation of individual components, but most products use mixes of material properties to, say, conduct electricity, create rotational bearings or transmit loads. This observation is stimulating research across the world into the development of automated fabrication systems for multi-material assemblies. The long- term vision being to create a next generation of “rapid prototyping” systems that can generate functional devices without manual assembly: so call rapid fabrication (RF) systems.

The obvious potential of multi-material fabrication systems have already started attracting serious government interest: for instance the recent (and excellent) WTEC Panel Report on “Additive and subtractive processes”[1] provides a fascinating overview of research work across Europe into advanced layered manufacturing processes ranging from 3D Bio-plotters to the sintering of micro-batteries. In almost every case reported by the WTEC panel a second forming process, or material, was being used to extend the capabilities of traditional layer manufacturing systems. However, like any industry, RP vendors (and research funders), tend to set relatively incremental goals, with eyes fixed on the production of, say, a functional graded alloy or cell scaffold, where clear commercial opportunities are already apparent.

So although the development of RF systems is firmly on the research agenda, progress is slow. This has not stopped academics, on both sides of the Atlantic, talking up the long- term potential of these systems by predicting the “End of Manufacturing” and setting out visionary research agendas for the creation of personal, domestic manufacturing system.

For example at Bath University in the UK, Dr Bowyer has schematic designs for a machine he calls a RepRap[2] that could fabricated electro-mechanical devices via an automated process.

The RelRap could take decades to become a robust reality, but there is already evidence to suggest that long before the first RF machines appear society will start to change. In his new book Gershenfeld (2005) MIT Professor Neil Gershenfeld describes the creative explosion witnessed from Boston to Ghana when people are given access to desktop CAD/CAM facilities that allow them to be personally involved in the design and fabrication of functional items for their own use. Like Bowyer he envisages a time when universal manufacturing machines will be commonplace, but rather than wait he has started trying to explore the consequences today. Effectively Gershenfeld has been creating facilities (called “Fab-labs”) that enable people to do manual simulation of the automated process envisaged by Bowyer. The results make fascinating reading and suggest how the replacement, transformation cycle might play out for RP.

The original RP systems were created to allow 3D components to be produced as one-offs without the expense of mass production methods (e.g. casting, machining, pressing, etc.). But if Gershenfeld and Bowyer are correct RP technology will eventually undermine the need for centralised mass production (and the manufacturing technologies that support it). In this way the production of manufacturing tooling could go the same way as magnetic tapes and paper drawings.

However, key to every step of this path is the effective automation of processes used to direct, deposit and place material, or components, at specific locations: in other words robotics (albeit hidden inside a rapid fabrication machines) will be key to the “end of manufacturing”.

Notes1. The RepRap Project, available at: www.reprap.org2. WTEC Panel Report: “European research and development in additive/subtractive manufacturing”, available at: www.wtec.org/additive/additive-report.pdf

ReferenceGershenfeld, N. (2005), The Coming Revolution on Your Desktop. From Personal Computers to Personal Fabricators, Basic Books, New York, NY, April.

Jonathan CorneyScottish Manufacturing Institute, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK