3D printers in every home? How about every home being 3D-printed? See how one Chinese design firm built 10 houses in just ONE day.
#Atmel #3DThursday #3DPrinting #3DPrinters #MakerMovement (via @RT111 )
http://buzz.mw/bpzj6_l
The printer didn’t print any houses.
It printed panel over more than one day and they were assembled in one day.
Why do people not watch the video and read the words on this.
The title of this post does say “3D printed” and “Design firm built ten houses in just one day”. Since the house parts were 3D printed, I think it qualifies.
How many times are we going to see this? I’ve seen it posted at least 10 times.
@Gene_Jordan_GeekTink really you think printing panels isnt part of the build of a printed house…its the whole point.
So pre cast concrete panels are technically printed by your terms.
Tell me more about its…
Both.
@Gene_Jordan_GeekTink really you want to split hairs.
The wood isnt printed or the glass.
Please its not 10 houses printed and assembled in a day.
Wooden prefabs this size would be assembled just as quick if not quicker.
So please the only headline should be 3d printed panels form housing shell.
@Nigel_Dickinson I would personally rather concentrate on the positives instead of the negatives and encourage you to do the same. The cup is always full, after all.
How many decades has the technology for wooden prefabs been around while 3D printing anything is just beginning to walk on two feet.
The headline did it’s job by grabbing the reader’s attention and drawing it to the exhibition of a new technology. I maintain that it is still technically correct.
The material for these houses is also made from recycled construction materials, while the wooden prefabs are not. The technology did not allow for the roofs to be made, but that is something they are striving for in the future. In other reports, it does state that the houses were printed in one day. This one says printed, then built in one day. Either way, it’s still an amazing new technology.
@Gene_Jordan_GeekTink look as was posted by somebody else its the 10 th time is been posted.
This last 2 weeks.
Every time it gives the impression its better than current tech.
Its not even proven that this style of printing is able to stand up to weather.
From what I’ve seen of the panels the jointing is liable to fail in the same way prefab concrete houses did.
As for recycled products wood is still greener and very recyclable.
Like I said future tech that’s unproven and hardly worth wetting your pants for.
@Nigel_Dickinson I don’t see this as giving any impression that it’s “better than current tech”. Rather, it’s showing the potential of the direction 3D printing is heading in when applied to architecture. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you missed the words about this being done by a building company as an exhibition. Nobody said anything about “wetting one’s pants” over it. However, testing of unproven future technology is usually referred to as research and development. The results of which are usually displayed through exhibitions. Magazines Ike Popular Mechanics and Popular Science have been doing this for years. Now we get to read about it on the Internet and watch moving pictures about it in real color. 
@Gene_Jordan_GeekTink there’s another post today using this same article and once again it gives the impression the printer printed these 10 “houses” in situ all in a day on another print forum.
I’m still not convinced it was done this quick and still haven’t even seen a time lapse of them printing or assembling these products.
I believe its hype on the time frame.
Perhaps something was lost in the translation from Chinese. Either way, I see no reason to doubt what they are saying without proof otherwise. The video shows the printer moving at a much faster pace than casting concrete with conventional forms would. Since its not solid concrete, the curing time and weight would be much lower as well. Not everyone in the world needs thousands of square feet for a house. Especially in a country with a population the size of China.