Preferences

I call bullshit. 3d-printing is just a manufacturing method. Basic woodworking is much cheaper and more accessible than 3d-printing, do you call it vibe-coding?

If you carve a wooden part with "the right shape" for an engineering application that the part lacks the physical properties that allow it to perform under load stress ... then yes, that's vibe carving.

Looks good - falls apart in practice, and a junior can't tell the difference as they "look the same" to the inexperienced eye.

From practical experience, you cannot just replace a tyre on a car with any old bit of wood - you really need to use hard wearing mulga (or equivilant) as an emergency skid. (And replace that as soon as possible)

What you're describing is more like someone who doesn't know computer science principles hacking on code, manually. Part of the definition of "vibe coding" is that AI agents (of questionable quality) did the actual work.
> then yes, that's vibe-carving.

This whole thread is a stretch, IMO. But, I like this phrase.

As a fabricator (large wood CNC, laser cutting and engraving, 3D Printing, UV Printing, Welding). I put engineering into a whole different job scope. I can make whatever you tell me really well, not vibe-carving.

I don't necessarily write the specs or "engineer" anything. I'm just saying, don't blame the medium, 3D printing. The fact is a fabricator is not necessarily an engineer, regardless of the medium.

Don't get me wrong, wood is great, I've made a lot of things and replacement parts from appropriate woods.

Using scrublands wood (slow growing tough long grain mulga) as a skid when a rubber tyre destroys itself is an old old hack passed on by my father (he's still kicking about despite being born in the early 1930s).

In the early 1980s I used to enjoy hanging out with Chris Brady and helped out making jigs to assemble snare drums: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdBHtUN5gAE

His jarrah, wandoo, and sheoak snares are still loved: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKmDuu5Iba4

Point being, I don't blame processes (3D printing, etc) for part failure, that comes down to whether the shape and material are fit for purpose, whether material grain structure can be aligned for sufficient strength if required, whether expansion coefficients match to avoid stress under thermal changes, etc.

Engineering manufacturing can sometimes be suprisingly holistic in the sense that every small things matter including the order in which steps are performed (hysteresis) .. there's more t things than meet the eye.

This item has no comments currently.