5 ms·
Well, small production runs are sensible with 3D printing. I suppose what you're noting is that the 3D model is not shared with you. That web page doesn't men
by minopret 12y ago
Well, small production runs are sensible with 3D printing.
I suppose what you're noting is that the 3D model is not shared with you.
That web page doesn't mention the mechanism being protected by any current patents. Maybe there's no need. This is a mechanism resulting from substantial engineering work. It has significant tolerances, proportions, and curves. If you're not capable of creating it yourself, then it's also unlikely you'll reverse-engineer it just by looking at it.
Someone could laser-scan it. If using a visible-range laser, that person might have to take the mechanism apart first. Then I would hope that person would give due credit for any results, as well as consider what other legal and ethical barriers may inhibit reproducing this work.
- Someone 12y agoYou probably can reverse-engineer it from photos, too. Projections aren't nicely frontal, but there are quite a few parts that you know are circular, so you can straighten out the photos fairly easily. Getting the small details right will be problematic, but there are plenty of photos around on the net that will allow you to average multiple shape reconstructions. For example, http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/the-tourbillon-1000-3d-printed-horological-sculpture http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/the-tourbillon-1000-3d-printed-... has detailed photos of parts. It also says: "While 3D printing is getting much more advanced, and very quickly, it's not an exact science yet, so Manousos does have to fine-tune components as he creates each tourbillon" Price is less than I feared, at $3000,—. If it were a real clock, that would be a bargain, compared to the typical designer watch, but considering what needs to be added to produce a clock, I guess that a complete watch will be comparable in price.