I have been punishing myself by fretting over the TEDEX forum. I started it may years ago even before the current date which is showing about 5 years. It has been closer to ten years as I had one system crash that totally wiped out the original forum and messages during a move between ISP server companies.

Blogs like this one were not even thought of or invented back then. The BBS and Forums were and still are great places to share information in an interest group.  Blogs do that too but require much more user discipline. I tried it here for awhile but management was messy.

I got within two weeks of shutting the TEDEX down. I am just today placing a hold but still counting on the fate of TEDEX. I love the Internet but it truly is a “big city” cesspool. I don’t want to regulate freedom of communication but regulation is necessary when it is my own and isn’t universal.

The TEDEX forum is now a private membership by request, but open for general viewing except for the pictures. Only members (logged in) can see the pictures.

I hate to lose all the information and pictures available in TEDEX by just shutting it down. It is still a great place for members to post whatever they want. I know some folks like to think of it as an on line club room. That is OK with me.

The welcome messages in TEDEX tells the story.

I am nurturing an idea for a “future state” THMS web publication. The literal big picture is video. I believe Internet bandwidth and present day hardware are fully capable of exploiting this content delivery method. Example: My last post contains video.

Since the beginning of the World Wide Web, but more so as it became commercial, the medium has been handicapped by the belief (and a self standard) we could not abandon the old obsolete tools and practices of the past. Some websites today are still being constructed to accommodate text only browsers. I am not trying to be a techno snob but, TEXT ONLY BROWSERS!! Give me a break.

The Amish value the “simple” life, so the horse and buggy make perfect sense. But just like the horse, text only browsing is not in my view a mission of the modern highway called the Internet. Yes, it can be accommodated over on the berm*, but it is truly out of place. (*Chiefly Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. the bank of a canal or the shoulder of a road.)

I am designing my future messages using the visual method of quality video presentation as well as continue my present standard of high quality photography. The video and new photo story pages will be in a new format section linked to the present THMS website. The present “frames” site and this blog will continue unchanged.

Blogs are the hot delivery medium, and I already have three. I decided not use the blog format for my new design. I won’t be looking for easy feedback, as blogs attract a huge assortment of low life and spammers because of that feature. I presently reject 99.9% of entered comments because of off topic abuse. In my opinion, spam is killing open blogging.

We will all see more and more use of video on the Internet. No doubt U-Tube is the force driving the popularity, but I am not enamored by its percentage of poor (amateur shot) video quality and ad filled presentation. To me it seems more like the “arm pit” of mass video storage. That said, it is still an “interesting” place to explore as a cultural experience.

The biggest problem to overcome and the solution that U-Tube provides, is a fixed standard for video presentation. That is the greatest asset of using the U-Tube venue, the single presentation standard. Shoot with anything and it converts to a viewable show.

Establishing my own technical standard is what I have decided. I want total control of picture quality, view size, audio quality and content… with no ads or spam.

I have tried and displayed just about every video format available and posted them in my web pages in one place or another. All have their fan-boy advocates and all do the job with reasonable success. I need to choose just one as a standard.

I am an Adobe user from the early days of their existence. I have acquired their complete suite of tools through the years. For example, I was forced into the Dreamweaver editor through acquisition and now (almost) can’t work without it.

I will be updated to Adobe CS5 Master as soon as it is delivered. Flash 10.1 is the current media of preference for the big sites and will be for mine. Although Flash is not officially blessed by Apple for its new toys, this is the way life is. Decisions must be made. My web content is not intended for hand held’s. I hope iPad, Slate and the other medium format displays, establish compatibility.

Change is coming. I am excited to play with new toys. I enjoy communication as much as shop work and would do this even if I had an audience of only one. Thank all of you that keep proving to me that single person audience isn’t true and that you are out there watching.

I receive requests from designers and people with ideas asking if I can make something for them. Most of the time I say no, because I have enough projects of my own on which I would like to be working. There are also some designs that are beyond my means, usually because it is too large or requires special tooling and materials. (I wish I could charge the designer for the new tools!!)  Some if not most of the designs also suffer from knowledge of how things are made on machine tools. The sketches and drawings show holes where they can’t be drilled or unnecessary and difficult areas requiring multiple setups.

These requests show that there is a need for prototyping services and these inventors and idea people have problems turning their ideas into products.

But prototyping is not as simple as sending out an unproven design for bids. (Yes, I know it is done.) But I am talking about solicitations from hobbyist and small time inventors who have never worked with a prototype or even in a machine shop. A good design is one that can also be made as inexpensively as possible on standard machines and tooling. That seldom happens on the version #1.

What I am saying is the folks who approach me don’t realize their design may need a lot of cooperation (face time) between the designer and the maker. Of course I am not talking about a bar of aluminum with two holes drilled into it. The designer can do that himself. I see the hard stuff, like machining threads on a very thin tube and the tube is thinner than the thread depth. (Yes, I have seen this.)

Outsourcing prototyping is not inexpensive. Building a prototype may cost 100 to 1000 times what a design will cost in production.

I imagine a hobbyist with a new retract gear design for a model airplane would drop dead if I quoted $2,000 to build the working prototype and $100/hr for consulting. Time is a BIG part of prototyping cost. Making special tools and fixtures also greatly adds to the cost. So this has to be considered in the design and the time it will take to make the first one.

Many hobbyists wisely choose to do their own prototyping. I sell the small machine tools suitable for such work. The problem may be… the hobbyist will have to develop machining skills by trial and error. So the invention design is only a small part of the item cost, ninety percent if not more is getting the idea built.

I have been in several nuclear science labs at prestigious universities and I was surprised and pleased to see that they have their own fully equipped machine shops. They are used for design and construction of their specialized apparatus for nuclear experiments. The large components they outsource (at very high cost) but a lot of the small chambers, brackets and guides are built by the students in their own machine shop.  The reason is cost and to have the ability to quickly make changes.

The reason I enjoy my hobby is I can do everything for myself. It is called design build in the engineering world. I am free to make changes anytime and in any way I desire. I may throw the whole first start away and start over with an improvement. The hobby is often called model engineering rather than amateur machinist.

The problem is having that freedom when you are working with a customer design and a fixed budget. That $2,000 quote may turn into $4,000 real cost.

 Design, specify, build on a prototype is a very risky for both the designer and the builder. It is also not good for either as the cost goes up. What’s needed is a mutual rather than an adversarial relationship. “You told me you could make it for $25.00. Now you say the real cost is $125.00” is adversarial. No one wins. A designer should never bid a prototype for the lowest cost. No one will be happy at the end.

Competitive bid is the way to go when you are going to make 1000 items all the same and the prototype proves the method of manufacture. The cost to make that fixture for one part is now one thousandth the cost of the prototype.

The person with the $3000 retract gear prototype cost can spread that cost over 1000 items ($3.00/item) If the retracts sell at $300 a set the prototype is 1% of the cost. Yes the prototype cost $3000 to build one but the production unit is priced at $300.00. Those are the facts my friends.

It also shouts out there is no financial reason to custom making something that is already mass produced. A hobbyist may just want to because he can, but that is not a good business decision.

© 2010 The Hobbyist's Machine Shop Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha