How much of a loss of precision would we expect in one generation of autofacs?
As a concrete example, let’s say one of the components of an autofac is a 0.03125 inch (±0.1 thousandths) CNC drill bit. Can your autofac make another such drill bit out of the same material and at the same level of precision?
If not, maybe we have to ship in the drill bits as well. But there are a large number of things like this, and at some point you’ve got a box that can assemble copies of itself from prefabricated parts, but uses a pretty standard supply chain to obtain those prefabricated parts. Which, to be clear, would still be pretty cool.
There are standard ways to make more precise tools from less precise tools. The methods were invented 1750-1840 to allow upgrading handmade metal tools to the precision of thousandths of inches we enjoy today. We just have to apply such methods a little bit at every generation to keep the level of precision constant.
They depend on lapping, which can be done “manually” by the robot arm. I forgot to list “abrasive powder” in my list of vitamin ingredients. Fixed now.
The fancier optical techniques provide precision on the order of a wavelength, which is far in excess of our needs. All we need is eyeball-class optical techniques like looking along an edge to make sure it’s straghtish, or pressing a part against a surface plate and seeing if light passes under it.
How much of a loss of precision would we expect in one generation of autofacs?
As a concrete example, let’s say one of the components of an autofac is a 0.03125 inch (±0.1 thousandths) CNC drill bit. Can your autofac make another such drill bit out of the same material and at the same level of precision?
If not, maybe we have to ship in the drill bits as well. But there are a large number of things like this, and at some point you’ve got a box that can assemble copies of itself from prefabricated parts, but uses a pretty standard supply chain to obtain those prefabricated parts. Which, to be clear, would still be pretty cool.
There are standard ways to make more precise tools from less precise tools. The methods were invented 1750-1840 to allow upgrading handmade metal tools to the precision of thousandths of inches we enjoy today. We just have to apply such methods a little bit at every generation to keep the level of precision constant.
Don’t those methods tend to rely on lapping and optics? You don’t seem to have any equipment for those.
They depend on lapping, which can be done “manually” by the robot arm. I forgot to list “abrasive powder” in my list of vitamin ingredients. Fixed now.
The fancier optical techniques provide precision on the order of a wavelength, which is far in excess of our needs. All we need is eyeball-class optical techniques like looking along an edge to make sure it’s straghtish, or pressing a part against a surface plate and seeing if light passes under it.
I really like this video on the subject of how humanity first developed precision machines: https://youtu.be/gNRnrn5DE58?si=NMk1BAsU6_XMuLbL
See also: https://youtu.be/djB9oK6pkbA?si=ObFPCZkR-Rx9AC2G