Better yet would be to crack an open source frame work for additive building.
3d print lugs then bond in steel/carbon/aluminium tubes.
Open source the engineering and software that would allow someone to just plug in the geo they want and it would spit out a simple lug file that can be sent off to any commercial 3d printer.
Better yet would be to crack an open source frame work for additive building.
3d print lugs then bond in steel/carbon/aluminium tubes.
Open source the engineering and software that would allow someone to just plug in the geo they want and it would spit out a simple lug file that can be sent off to any commercial 3d printer.
The semi-3D manufacturing of RobotBikeCo and Atherton Bikes is a dead-end. It's a transitional technology. Clever for its time in the way RobotBikeCo applied it to custom geometry. Unfortunately for Atherton Bikes, their application of it benefits only them, not the consumer, by reducing the capital costs associated with molds. I frequently ask people to pitch their idea by answering "What does [proposal] do that [existing option] doesn't?"; I'd be interested to hear Atherton Bikes' response.
Full-frame 3D and 2.5D additive manufacturing in carbon already exists, it's just a matter of waiting for the technology to improve and become affordable.
shirk-007 wrote:
Better yet would be to crack an open source frame work for additive building.
3d print lugs then bond in steel/carbon/aluminium tubes.
Open source the engineering and software that would allow someone to just plug in the geo they want and it would spit out a simple lug file that can be sent off to any commercial 3d printer.
That's exactly what RobotBikeCo did. My understanding is a consumer could plug in their own numbers, pay online, and the Robot staff could arrive at the Robot headquarters to either a block of printed lugs or a file needing only a mouse click to get started. If Atherton Bikes doesn't continue on this route, they're not making full use of their manufacturing system.
That's a lot of work for a small audience and no compensation.
It's Pheller that wants a project. I agree that it would be crappy for a couple people to do all the work for no real compensation.
Now if you could find 10-15 people with portions of the skills needed to pull it off and divide up the work it wouldn't be soo bad. Still no compensation.
Needed.
People with CAD skills People with FEA skills fab skills to build test rigs to prove out the above work.
IIRC, ICB was designed via a poll then sent to Taiwan for a proto, then made open source with a few CAD drawings to supply to the builder of choice for various sizes.
RMRs requirement for a linkage fork throws a wrench in things. Im just not sure we could ever make it sexy.
Linkage front fork with shock and a monostrut rear suspension lols
Why havent we started a Pinkbike version of the ICB yet? RMR designs, tshokx and shirk welds it, swan and whatshisface from Tahoe get together to settle who really has the biggest peen. We got enough shop bros in this thread to line up some good deals on components.
I have the biggest e-peen on the forum..Iggz definitely is the better rider.
Here's my idea. We got the linkage fork for R-M-R. Geo looks to be on point since long stems are back in vogue. Someone's already gone through all the trouble of prototyping it. All we need is the plans.
Here's my idea. We got the linkage fork for R-M-R. Geo looks to be on point since long stems are back in vogue. Someone's already gone through all the trouble of prototyping it. All we need is the plans.
Jesus... I didn't go a bike could be that hideous.