MUPPette Flying UAV 3D Printer Unveiled

[Brian_Krassenstein]

The beginning stages of the MUPPette flying 3D printer have been unveiled. This printer is being created by three designers working for a company called Gensler in Los Angeles, California. The MUPPette 3D printer uses an unmanned aerial vehicle, a gimble for stabilization, and a 3D printer extruder to print PLA plastics from the air. The purpose of the project, which has been going on for 13 months already, is to create a 3D printer which has no build size constraints. There is still a lot of work to be done, with Gensler planning to work on this thing for several years to come.
Further details on this amazing machine can be found here: http://3dprint.com/4111/muppette-3d-printer-flying/

Check out the picture of the video of the MUPPette below:

[3D OZ]

"There is still a lot of work to be done" said Captain Understatement.

In 13 months they managed to get a copter off the ground carrying an extruder which then extruded totally indiscriminately. Pointless.

Just as useful as taping an extruder to your Cat!

[MrSmiley666]

Just as useful as taping an extruder to your Cat!

Dogs would probably be a better build platform. i cant get my cat to do anything.

[f.larsen]

"There is still a lot of work to be done" said Captain Understatement.

In 13 months they managed to get a copter off the ground carrying an extruder which then extruded totally indiscriminately. Pointless.

Just as useful as taping an extruder to your Cat!

I'm at work right now, and I just BLURTED out a stream of laughter, that was well said. Still giggling - extruder on your cat.

[Larry]

Although they may still have a ways to go I do feel that they are onto something. Why do I feel this way? Because Drone and 3d printing technologies are expanding extremely quickly. Look how far we have come in only 2-3 years.

[dmanexe]

The key problem here is that 3D printers have tolerances of millimeters, which can fail a build. You have to stabilize the extruder in real space, within millimeters, and that's something that these multi-rotors just can't do.

[f.larsen]

I think the key problem is time, then weight, then tolerance.

Drones do not last longer then 30 minutes. Okay, so you put a bigger battery on it, well that adds weight, which means you have to have bigger motors which also adds more weight. It's a curve that doesn't give you the return you would want. Then, you strap on a different battery to run the extruder, heating and stepper motor, have you felt how heavy those are, even for an octocopter this weight will be important.

This is when I agree with dmanexe, tolerance of a millimeter. All of us try really hard to minimize the wobble and vibration on your 3d printers and those are sitting on solid ground. Now you have a device that is subjected to winds and extreme vibration. Did you even watch the video, it was all over the place. Yes I know it's in it's infancy and accuracy will come with time, but then I refer to my original point - time.

At this time it is a neat concept. It's hard enough to get people to buy into a desktop 3d printer. It's hard for people to purchase a quadrocopter, nevermind a octocopter. Putting both together is extremely niche.

I'm glad it's considered a research project.

[CaptainObvious]

Have to agree with f.larsen, this thing is useless.
If you need to print something so large that you have to use a multicopter then it will take a lot longer to print than the flight autonomy of the machine. You'll need a swarm of drones to get anything done in a reasonable amount of time and then in between the complexity and cost of that you'd be better off building a honking big printer in the first place, or perhaps something like a robot arm on wheels with an extruder that could move around a large print.

[3D OZ]

The whole concept is fundamentally flawed, flawed to the point where it is obvious that not only is a workable solution not possible, even if it were possible, there is no need for it.
These guys are failing to solve a problem that doesn't exist and they've spent 13 months doing it.
In 13 months all they have done is mount an extruder to a commercial copter!
Technical breakthroughs achieved = 0. Progress towards workable solution = 0.

The footage of extrusion occurring while the copter is totally STATIONARY shows that the gimbal cannot even handle the wobble caused by the extrusion gear turning, how can it hope to compensate for a copter in the breeze.
The gimbal sort of compensates for some movement in two dimensions but the copter is unstable in 3 dimensions.

All of the fundamental failures aside, I defy anyone to identify a single item that this waste of neurons could create that would be of any possible use that could not be better created in a more conventional way.

Total rubbish

[Feign]

The whole concept is fundamentally flawed, flawed to the point where it is obvious that not only is a workable solution not possible, even if it were possible, there is no need for it.

This, while they've concevably come up with a problem this could be a solution to (making a printer with no build size limit), anyone who has both flown a quadcopter and calibrated a 3D printer could tell that this was not the way to solve that problem.

This was taking two popular toys, smashing them together and coming up with a problem that they can claim to have solved.

I really hope nobody got money for this.