3D printed and solar-powered pavilion!

http://curbed.com/archives/2015/08/26/solar-pavilion-3d-printing.php

Solar_Bytes_Pavilion_110.jpg

This Experimental Pavilion Is 3D-Printed and Solar-Powered

In yet another experiment proving the merits of 3D printing technology, Kent State University in Ohio has erected a 3D-printed sculpture called the Solar Bytes Pavilion, designed by assistant professor Brian Peters. Comprising 94 modules made of 3D-printed, translucent plasticeach embedded with photovoltaic cells—the arch provides shade during the day and emits a mellow white glow at night. The structural detail, the joinery, the east-west placement of the arch, the variability of how each module emits light; each point to a carefully considered design. The best part? Much of the structure can be recycled after use. At the end of its time on campus, the installation’s modules will be taken apart, shredded, and the material made into something new.

Solar_Bytes_Pavilion_13.jpg

Solar_Bytes_Pavilion_114.jpg

Solar_Bytes_Pavilion_18.jpg

curbed.com

by Komal Sharma | Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Advertisements

3D printing with light

http://3dprint.com/89024/calarts-3d-printing-with-light/

IMG_2444

CalArts Student Experiments with 3D Printing Light

Not all 3D printing is meant to last. When CalArts student Aaron Bothman decided to print something for his short film The Red Witch, his thesis project, he wanted it to be less permanent. Having seen the work of Beijing-based artist Ekaggrat Singh Kalsi, who has used a modified 3D printer to ‘print’ in light, he found his inspiration.

Not something that you can pick up with your hands, the product of this technique is something that can be captured on film, which is exactly the medium in which Bothman works.

He and his father worked together on building the printer, a small delta model constructed from a kit but with a particular twist. When assembled, an LED was placed where the hot end would usually have been installed. This allows Bothman to capture the light on film by using a long exposure while the printer runs the model, tracing out the shapes as a 3D light painting.

Ripple_400x400

This isn’t the first 3D printing project that Bothman junior and Bothman senior have worked on together. In an interview with 3DPrint.com, Aaron talked about his experience printing with his father and how it has influenced his work both while at CalArts and after graduation:

“I’m an animator and artist based in Los Angeles. I graduated from the animation program at CalArts a couple months ago, and am currently working as an artist at JibJab, a small studio in LA. I originally learned about 3D printing in middle school from my dad, who teaches mechanical engineering at UCSB, and who helped a lot in thinking through this project. As a stop-motion filmmaker, 3D printing allows me to tackle more ambitious projects on a short production schedule than I might be able to otherwise.”

Wave_400x400

In order to create the light animation, each Maya image to be captured is sent to the printer one frame at a time. Over time, these images create the illusion of movement, just as is done in more traditional stop motion filming. The result is a piece that is built up in layers, requiring the same mode of conceptualization as a 3D printing project but with the option for movement and, of course, no support materials. In fact, no materials at all, something that makes this a particularly appealing way to engage in a 3D printed project if there is no need for the product to be tangible.

Somewhat akin to the old question about a tree falling in the forest with no one to hear it, the question that could be asked of this technique could be: when a 3D printer creates something that cannot be touched, is it still 3D printing? The creations don’t truly occupy space or at least they only do for a fleeting moment but as they dance before your eyes, I think you may be willing to set that debate aside for a moment. Just think of it this way: with this technique, you could print all you want and never run up a bill for filament and never have to worry about storage space.

And that sounds pretty ideal to me.

Let us know what you think about this concept in the 3D Printing with Light forum thread at 3DPB.com.

3dprint.com

by  | AUGUST 15, 2015

3D printed eggs used to study the art of deception among birds

http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/6777/20150528/scientists-use-3d-printed-eggs-to-study-the-art-of-deception-among-birds.htm

Scientists Use 3D Printed Eggs to Study the Art of Deception among Birds

3D printing has already established itself within the scientific community. It’s been used to produce tools aboard the International Space Station, replicate body parts for surgical procedures, and now it’s found a new niche among biologists studying bird behavior. It turns out, 3D printers produce mighty fine eggs.

Animal behaviorists at Hunter College of the City University of New York are using 3D printers to produce eggs used in experiments that examine nesting behavior among birds. They’re particularly interested in brood parasites – birds that lay their eggs in other birds’ nests, for the behavior of such birds offers insight into the evolutionary arms race between species.

Successful brood parasites are well-adapted to their deceptive practice, laying eggs that resemble those whose nests they target for takeover. But the foster birds have evolved means of detecting such eggs, based on their size, shape, color, and pattern, and will cast them out of the nests when the interlopers are identified.

“Hosts of brood parasites vary widely in how they respond to parasitic eggs, and this raises lots of cool questions about egg mimicry, the visual system of birds, the ability to count, cognitive rules about similarity, and the biomechanics of picking things up,” says Prof. Don Dearborn, chair of the Biology Department at Bates College, a brood parasitism expert who was not involved in the 3D printing study.

Biologists have been studying brood parasitic behavior for decades, but it was always a challenge to produce realistic eggs for use in their experiments. They tried a variety of materials, such as wood and plaster, but the eggs were expensive and time consuming to produce and a challenge to reproduce consistently.

And that’s where the 3D printers come in.

The scientists from Hunter College used a 3D printer to produce model eggs based on those of the Brown-headed Cowbirds, a North American brood parasite. Some eggs were painted beige to match real cowbird eggs; other were painted blue-green to match eggs of the American robin, a typical target of cowbirds. They were able to fill the model eggs with water or gel, so that the eggs retained the weight and properties of real eggs.

Their experiments were a rousing success. The robins accepted 100% of the blue-green eggs while they rejected 79% of the beige eggs. Similar results were achieved using plaster eggs, but the 3D printed eggs are more consistent and easier to produce. And since they are based on digital models, it makes for easy sharing across scientific communities, which improves the reproducibility of experiments.

“For decades, tackling these questions has meant making your own fake eggs — something we all find to be slow, inexact, and frustrating,” says Dearborn. “This study uses 3D printing for a more nuanced and repeatable egg-making process, which in turn will allow more refined experiments on host-parasite coevolution. I’m also hopeful that this method can be extended to making thin-shelled, puncturable eggs, which would overcome another one of the constraints on these kinds of behavioral experiments.”

“3D printing technology is not just in our future – it has already revolutionized medical and basic sciences,” says Mark Hauber, an animal behaviorist at Hunter College and the study’s senior author. “Now it steps out into the world of wild birds, allowing standardized egg rejection experiments to be conducted throughout the world.”

sciencetimes.com

by May 28, 2015 11:29 PM EDT

DNA used to 3D printing?

A 30-year old PhD student has collected DNA ‘leftovers’ from fingernails, cigarette butts etc. and used them to create and 3D print the faces of the people who left their DNA behind.in public areas.

What’s your say on the ethics of DNA use, as well as the (un)ethical use of 3D printing?

http://www.theguardian.com/…/…/jun/01/dna-art-recreate-faces

A strand of DNA

A new ethical dilemma: is it wrong to use people’s DNA ‘leftovers’ to create works of art (or for any other purpose)?
Your DNA is as personal as you can get. It has information about you, your family and your future. Now, imagine it is used – without your consent – to create a mask of your face. Working with the DNA bits left behind by strangers, a Brooklyn artist makes us think about issues of privacy and genetic surveillance.Heather Dewey-Hagborg, a 30-year-old PhD student studying electronic arts at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute has the weird habit of gathering the DNA people leave behind, from cigarette butts and fingernails to used coffee cups and chewing gum. She goes to Genspace (New York City’s Community Biolab) to extract DNA from the detritus she collects and sequence specific genomic regions from her samples. The data are then fed into a computer program, which churns out a facial model of the person who left the hair, fingernail, cigarette or gum behind. Using a 3D printer, she creates life-sized masks – some of which are coming to a gallery wall near you.

Such a process might seem artistically cutting-edge to some. But, for most of us, the “yuck!” factor quickly kicks in. Among one of my horrifying nightmares is the fear to be accused of a crime I did not commit. Picture the scene: you were at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and circumstantial evidence builds against you. Like in any dream, you are trying to shout out loud that you are innocent, but no sound comes out. In my nightmare, the last chance to be saved always comes from DNA testing. After comparing my DNA to that found on the crime scene, I am finally freed. In many ways, DNA has been seen in a very positive light, but that is starting to change as more ethical questions arise.

For my generation, the one born with DNA-profiling that began in 1987 and raised on films like Gattaca, developments in human genetics have directly influenced self-perceptions and experiences. One positive example of this influence is the do-it-yourself biology movement. Genspace allows lab members to design workshops, train students and innovate with new technologies.

Whether you find what Heather Dewey-Hagborg does cool or creepy, DNA-profiling experiment raises a number of legal and ethical questions that no one knows how to handle. To what degree does the DNA we leave behind in public spaces belong to us? Does a facial mask without a name raise the same issues as a photo? In either case, what exactly is our expectation of privacy?

Just because an individual sheds DNA in a public space does not mean that the individual does not care about preserving the privacy of the data in the DNA. There was no informed consent given to access that data. On the other hand, some might say the major problem is not unauthorized access to data but misuse of data. It is easy to imagine a scenario where someone could inadvertently have their genome sequenced from a cigarette butt they left behind. If the person who tested the cigarette found a risk gene for a mental disorder and posted the results on Facebook, the information could affect the smoker’s social and professional life.

Of course, Dewey-Hagbord is not looking for degenerative diseases or mental disorders in the bits of DNA she picks up off New York’s sidewalks. But still, when the sequences come back from the lab, she compares them to those found in human genome databases. Based on this comparison, she determines the person’s ancestry, gender, eye color, propensity to be overweight and other traits related to facial morphology.

Beyond privacy, this search raises questions of the ability to identify someone from their DNA traces. To what extent do genetic traits (such as ancestry) tell you about how a person looks? Based on the analysis of these genetic traits, how accurate is the 3D facial model produced by the computer? At the request of a Delaware forensic practice, Dewey-Hagborg has been working on a sculpture from a DNA sample to identify the remains of an unidentified woman. This opens another black box at the connection between law enforcement and what we might call “DIY forensic science”: here, what is the role of the state versus that of the individual?

In the UK, the Human Tissue Act 2004 prohibits private individuals from covertly collecting biological samples (hair, fingernails, etcetera) for DNA analysis, but provides exclusion for medical and criminal investigations. The situation is more of a patchwork in the US. According to a 2012 report from the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, only about half of the states have laws that prevent testing someone’s DNA without their knowledge. It is encouraging, at least, to see that many lawmakers at the state-level have begun to discuss the question of privacy and genome sequencing.

In the near future, the Wilson Center in Washington, DC, will be providing a forum for further policy questions on this issue. On 3 June 2013, Dewey-Hagborg has been invited to discuss her research and motivations in a talk about privacy and genetic surveillance. Another discussion will follow on 13 June 2013 at Genspace in Brooklyn. Perhaps with the help of these and other academics, artists and policymakers, we can begin reaching a consensus about what boundaries we want to set for ourselves, before we accidentally end up in a Gattaca of our own creation.

THEGUARDIAN.COM
by Eleonore Pauwels | Saturday 1 June 2013