Rudolf Neumerkel

@Object_Zero_ Why does the residual value of such an equiment stay at 100%? I did not get how you got to this conclusion? Thanks

The Isomodal Factory If manufacturing equipment can arrive as an isofreight container and be setup in 1 day, then the residual value of that equipment after 3 years of use should be practically 100%, depreciation should converge to 0%. This is FUNDAMENTALLY different to how we capitalise plant equipment today. If your products are designed to retain residual value, by designing for the secondary market, then that FUNDAMENTALLY changes the lifecycle cost of ownership. This turns capital intensive industries into capital light industries, through nothing more than a different product design philosophy. If you design for forced obsolescence, or permissive obsolescence then the lifecycle cost of ownership is high, and your clients must operate a capital intensive balance sheet. If you design for retained residual value, and rapid redeployment, then the lifecycle cost of ownership is low, and your clients can operate a capital light balance sheet. If factory commissioning is more reversible and residual value is more retainable, then capital intensity is reduced and it’s suddenly much easier to capitalise new manufacturing capacity. This requires industrialist understanding, but you can trust me on this. Isomodal plant equipment is one path to accelerating reindustrialisation. This feels off, because buying equipment that is fast to redeploy FEELS like hedging your own failure, but it isn’t… it’s actually a path to faster business growth via lower capital intensity and a more efficient balance sheet. It’s counterintuitive initially, but at scale this theory will rip l any major industrial build out upward to faster growth.

@lichthauch thanks for sharing this poetic fire

Everything around me is rotting, so i build. that is it, that is the whole reason. God built six days and rested one. he could have stopped at function, he could have given us eyes that only see useful things, but he made color. he made sunsets. he made the shape of a woman's back. he made the sound of rain hitting a dirt road at night. beauty was not an afterthought, it was the first thought, everything else came after. i build because the world is falling apart, and a man who does not build is just watching a fire. i lay bricks straight, i put flowers where nobody will see them, i sand wood until the grain is smooth enough to hold without a glove. these are prayers. and the man who says beauty does not matter has never built anything, he has only consumed, and consumption leaves you hollow. everyone i know who only takes has the same eyes, empty, always hungry, looking for the next thing to swallow. hold a hammer instead. hold wood. hold stone. make something that does not need you to survive, and then walk away from it, and feel what that is. that is the closest i have ever got to being alive, and i am not giving it back.

@emm0sh holy sheeet

sheeted

@Object_Zero_ Thank you for sharing your perspectives and thoughts. I see them as nutrients for the creatives / innovators

Prototypes Building prototypes can be hard sometimes, but it’s one of my favourite things to do. Below is a photograph of Chicago Pipe One, the first reactor prototype. It was built in a squash court by Enrico Fermi in 1942. Some 25 years ago I built a 3D CAD model of Windscale Pile One for UKAEA. The Windscale Pile was a huge production core but it suffered a catastrophic Wigner fire in 1957. I was given copies of the original engineering package and manufacturing drawings from which to produce the CAD model. Some of the precision machining from the 1940s was difficult to believe, and the hand drafted GA was an incredible work of art, that should be hanging in a gallery if not for the reality of that one marking in the title block. Anyway, prototyping… What you will often see is that American teams will do early prototyping, often scrapping many early iterations and learning much about design for manufacturing, assembly, and test. European teams will often run a lot more operating simulations in the initial phases and will deal with manufacturing and assembly later. Once you live through the process on both sides of the Atlantic you see the fingerprints of both approaches in the products. But of course once you understand the differences, you can follow whatever path you like. You can do one or the other, hybrid, or mixed. Like most things in engineering, this deeper understanding just makes you better at all approaches. Prototypes… Sometimes prototypes are small, cheap and easy to do, sometimes they are big and expensive. A prototype nuclear reactor is the latter. This is why it often makes sense to build a non-nuclear prototype first, especially if you have a series of novel proprietary technologies that you intend to carry into a full product design. Often it makes sense to build multiple prototypes, perhaps one for each major proprietary technology that you are developing. This can be especially useful if your proprietary technology fundamentally changes the economics of the product category. Perhaps with entirely novel use of thermodynamics to solve long standing technical challenges, or deliberately selecting a more challenging neutronics arrangement because it switches a supply chain crunch for a supply chain glut. Smart people will usually identify the load bearing assumptions around your claims and will seek to kick them out to see if they are robust. Prototyping is the best way to substantiate your claims around your novel proprietary stuff, because theoretical is subordinate to empirical. Also, hardware is cool. Prototyping also demonstrates execution, and provides an auditable record of your capital efficiency and capital discipline. World class prototyping isn’t just technical success, it’s your risk control and capital efficiency. Things are often much easier if you throw more cash at them, what world class looks like is a rapid, cost controlled and risk dissipating technical success. Sometimes the product system is extremely complex, think a space shuttle, or a nuclear submarine. In these cases the R&D and prototyping is often staged and sequenced, and much of the system design is complex integration work around boundaries and interfaces. Such complex developments are rare. But sometimes you get the opportunity to do something so ambitious, in such a large design space that developing the program is an R&D exercise itself. In these cases, you need to design a risk dissipation machine and that means a program with a multitude of empirical prototypes. Dissipating such risk safely, rapidly, efficiently with private capital constraints can be a real challenge. But any worthy challenge should be sufficiently difficult that nobody other than yourself really understands what has been achieved. Historically the biggest and most complex challenges humans did were undertaken by public programs, as they were military assets. This is no longer the case.

@emm0sh With friction active, total bending stiffness E*I would increase cubically BI = b(t*n)^3 (!) with the number of lamellae instead of linearly BI = bt^3*n A gigantic difference.

i always found it frustrating in composite beam design that, when calculating shear flow, the bolted joints don’t grant some extra “oomph” through the friction generated between the layers warning: this doesn’t apply to screws or adhesive, just bolts it could be negligible, but, i could also imagine a world in which the net friction force resisting longitudinal shear is greater than the resistive shear of the bolts themselves thinking through the extremes: if you had lubricated beams (µ ~= 0) with high preload, you still have non-composite action but if you had a µ of 1 in Ff = Nµ with that preload, the bolts would see zero shear! what does this mean? if the bolted joint is slip critical, then your composite beam acts compositely why is this useful? well, most of the time you wouldn’t rely on this design mechanism. but if you’re in a pinch and need a little extra safety factor, i could see a version of this analysis getting you there if you model the beam as a hybrid of the two modes of behavior

This is the time to be a mad scientist philosopher hacker.

@bscholl Is this a rhino model?

There’s never been an airplane with a fuselage like Overture’s.

@emm0sh @yacineMTB and this is how you export 3D results in a modern FE package... couldnt be more cumbersome

@yacineMTB this is the current offering of the best FEA package for mechanical engineers it is genuinely shocking

electrical engineering is suck in the early 2000s. it's embarassing

@i2cjak @emm0sh yes

@emm0sh dxf of the three profiles?

chat how the fuck do I make this a 3d shape

@yacineMTB CAD is a blessing. Just some crazy Skrillex type music needed, the rest is sketches on paper and some good logic Please hand over a challenge

cad is such a grind man

"If you are irritated by every rub, how will you be polished?" - Rumi

@kaiarhodes Do you mean carbon fiber mats? In what sense would you still count them as a textile? (Textiles/membranes are awesome btw.)

Textile technology extends beyond the surface; in the construction industry, textiles can be used to reinforce concrete, enabling the creation of thin, lightweight, and durable structures with superior tensile strength and ductility.

@jimbelosic @zanehengsperger That’s actually genius 😂

@zanehengsperger 3D print all your equipment then move it around until you’re happy

best software for factory renderings or designs? something simple

German Manufacturing is BACK! Orders are rising rapidly, much faster than expected. Indicating that German industry has found its way back under Merz leadership. This is only the start for a Europe that will be even more prosperous than ever before!

As a neuroscientist, here are 8 ways to maximise misery: 1. Check your phone immediately after waking. Flood your brain with news designed to make you anxious and angry.

@yacineMTB Shading is horrible though

i'm getting very good at cad. programattic cad, in javascript.

It only needs a few crazy ones to fix a continent… Let's be crazy… I got something to announce: We're launching PROTOTYPE: a new fund, fully focused on Europe. A small fund that punches way above it's size. With it we back what Europe is world-class at: robotics, automation, manufacturing, and anything that requires hard engineering. First check. First round. As early as it gets. Europe invented industry. We're the birthplace of precision manufacturing. The second largest manufacturing hub on the planet. Leaders in automation and robotics. And yet… We sell out our best tech to China. We export our best founders & most of our investment money to the US. That's insanity. What should we do instead? Build the next trillion euro companies in robotics, manufacturing, automation right here: in Europe. Showcase to young founders what is possible and change the system around them where needed. What we will do: → Publish all our fund updates and build in public: updates.prototypecap.com → Showcase Europe’s Most Ambitious Startups on Youtube: @prototypecap" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">youtube.com/@prototypecap → Launch & support more projects like @euinc_petition. Enough talking about Europe. Time to build it: Startups, makerspaces, student clubs, and much more. → And most importantly, invest into the best founders in Europe. Same model as our previous funds that are in their top 1-5% cohorts worldwide. We won’t do a VC fund in the classic sense. This will be a community of hyper-ambitious people who want to actively change Europe for the better. It only needs a few crazy ones to fix a continent… Let's be crazy. Check out prototypecap.com!

@Xaraphim GPU accelerated Sir?

spent the last few hours woking with claude clode to implement this topology solver algorithm from some old research papers this is what happening behind the scenes when you run a topology optimization solver

@Xaraphim I meant with what (Software)

@NeumerkelRudolf yes

i abuse this laptop daily