While open source software development has been studied extensively, relatively little is known about the viability of the same development model for a physical object’s design. This thesis addresses this deﬁcit by exploring the extent to which this model is viable for the development of physical objects. It starts with a review of the relevant literature on open source and user innovation communities followed by a case study and survey of the RepRap community.
This community develops a digital fabrication system that can 3D print a large share of its own parts. This allows for a decentralized community to independently produce physical parts based on digital designs that are shared via the internet. Apart from improving the device, dedicated infrastructure was developed by user innovators.
The survey reveals substantial adoption and development of 3D printer technology, comparable to the larger vendors in the industry. RepRap community members arespending between 145 and 182 full-time equivalents and have spent between 382,000and 478,000 dollars on innovation alone. At the RepRap project’s 6 month doubling interval, it is entirely feasible that its adoption and disruptive levels of innovation will exceed that of the incumbent industry. Within the community there is a higher incidence in modiﬁcations of hardware than in software, and, surprisingly, hardware modiﬁcations are expected to be relatively easier for others to replicate. The level of collaboration is also higher for hardware than for software.
Many RepRap community members possess a fabrication capability that the aver-age person does not have access to. While this does limit the present day generality of the case study ﬁndings, there are many reasons to expect a high likelihood of personal access to digital fabrication in the near future. The rapid development and adoption of increasingly affordable, yet more powerful and valuable fabrication technologies and the anti-rival logic of open design allow user-dominant collaborative development to have signiﬁcant implications for the provisioning of goods in society.
I really like this. It provides a good understanding of what OSHW is about from both a theoretical and practical perspective. Further, the insights into RepRap, its history, and the community around it are very interesting. From a writing standpoint, it’s (naturally) academic, but not difficult to follow or overly dense. If you’re looking for some deep reading over the holidays, you should check it out.
Have an amazing project to share? Join the SHOW-AND-TELL every Wednesday night at 7:30pm ET on Google+ Hangouts.
Join us every Wednesday night at 8pm ET for Ask an Engineer!
Learn resistor values with Mho’s Resistance or get the best electronics calculator for engineers “Circuit Playground” – Adafruit’s Apps!
Maker Business — Shenzhen: The Silicon Valley of Hardware (Full Documentary) and Who invests in hardware?
Wearables — Take flight with shiny wings
Electronics — Inadequate volt signal
Biohacking — The Upside of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms)
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.