8 Social Media Posts About Additive Manufacturing: AM Radio #34

Additive manufacturing (AM) tends to see popular media coverage when a consumer good is 3D printed. 3D printed houses and fashion grace headlines at the moment. On social media, however, additive manufacturing is a daily topic of conversation for users, students and entrepreneurs. As digital editor for Additive Manufacturing Media, I have the pleasure of observing and engaging in some of those conversations. 

On this episode of the AM Radio podcast, Peter Zelinski and I review eight AM-related social media posts that caught my eye in recent weeks. Among the topics we discuss are machine modifications, a debatable assumption about large-format additive manufacturing and the AM fan-favorite, or maybe anti-fan favorite: AM’s cost effectiveness. Thanks for listening. Prefer to read? The transcript is below.

Transcript

Jodee McElfresh  00:05

Financial savings, modifications, large-format AM and more. We discuss social media posts that give insight on the status of additive manufacturing today on this episode of AM Radio.

Stephanie Hendrixson  00:26

This episode of the AM Radio podcast is brought to you by PTXPO, the trade show for North American plastics professionals. Join Additive Manufacturing Media and sister brand Plastics Technology for PTXPO 2023, coming up in March. Find more information at plasticstechnologyexpo.com.

Peter Zelinski  00:48

Welcome to AM Radio. I'm Pete Zelinski. I'm editor-in-chief with Additive Manufacturing Media and I'm joined by Jodee McElfresh. Hi Jodee.

Jodee McElfresh  00:56

Hi, Pete.

Peter Zelinski  00:57

So Jodee is our digital editor. I don't love that title, because it makes it sound like you're an AI.

Jodee McElfresh  01:03

Greetings, human.

Peter Zelinski  01:05

So you heard Jodee's voice at the very very start of this episode. But the thing is that if you follow us on social media, you've read her voice. AM-branded posts on LinkedIn, Instagram, Twitter, it's Jodee who composes that. That's part of the work that she does. And she's here, in part, because we're going to talk about social media. Today, we're going to respond to some things that we're seeing in social media about about additive manufacturing. Should we like, talk about how we think about social media?

Jodee McElfresh  01:41

Yeah. So with social media, there is the crafting of the message and watching the engagements roll in, and there are stats and analytics that anyone managing a page anywhere tracks on social media. But ultimately, what I, what we, what I think most people appreciate is the dialogue and, and really the interesting findings that people are willing to share whether it's on our AM Media pages, or really anywhere around the web.

Peter Zelinski  02:12

Yeah, so social media. So like, we're all there, and we're reading it, and we're watching it and, and in social media, even the additive manufacturing sphere of it, it can be weird and noisy and chaotic and doom scrolly. But it's, it's a chance to connect, like you say, and and there's interaction that comes out of it that's kind of an augment to what we're putting out there. And so I think we're going to kind of have an audio version of that interaction with social media here. We've kind of at random, found some social media posts we found out there that maybe we can talk about right here.

Jodee McElfresh  02:53

Of course, and we'll definitely link to all these posts in the show notes so you can see what we are seeing. All right, so our first post is a kind of a waste not, want not reminder. We posted a write up about a study on scrap recently, specifically about regrinding material used in large-format additive manufacturing. On our post about this study, someone named Maximilian Heres commented, claiming that support structures or machining chips from a large 3D printed mold can be on the order of hundreds of pounds. And he said that at his company, they occasionally had failed prints in excess of $10,000 in materials alone. He said, being able to repelletize and use this waste goes a long way to making large-format 3D printing an attractive manufacturing technique, but it also keeps the polymer out of the landfills. And I guess his remarks stand out because he's referring to a real dollar amount, which we don't always hear. And it's not a dollar  amount at which most, I think reasonable people would scoff: $10,000.

Peter Zelinski  04:00

So that study, it was conducted by SABIC materials company and the former company, Local Motors. Maximilian, who commented, was with Local Motors, his company now is Loci Robots, which is doing large format additive manufacturing and machining using robots. So that study it had to do with, can you reuse material, large format, polymer additive machines, extrusion machines, so material that's been melted, extruded and solidified one time? It's not like water becoming ice, liquid, ice, liquid. It's the, the polymer breaks down a little bit through that cycle. And so the question is, if you grind it up again, if you use it again, what is the effect of that? And so this study looked at different regrind percentages from 0% regrind, meaning totally pure material all the way up to 100% regrind and different thresholds along the way. And, and so summary of the findings is the quality and the look of the print is about the same regardless of the regrind level. But across that range of regrind percentages, you could lose up to about 20% of tensile strength. And that sounds like a lot, except it may be kind of isn't with a metal part that was smaller, that would be a significant change, you'd be looking for very likely very specific material properties. With these large format polymer machines. Oftentimes, you're just looking for a way to get a really big structure quickly in one piece, likely like a really big unique tool. And so, large format polymer structures are often over SPECT. So the 20% reduction in strength or less than that reduction, if there's partial regrind percentage, that's probably acceptable. So yeah, to maximilians point. It's a meaningful study, and it really does suggest we can keep this material out of landfills.

Jodee McElfresh  06:14

This SABIC study really got people's wheel spinning, which brings us to the second post. Our colleague, Stephanie Hendrixson, she shared this study on her own LinkedIn page. She posted some photos. Pretty cool, showing the 0% and 100% regrind use, and Martin Lansard posed a question in the comments on her post. So he asked essentially, how large does the print have to be, to be LFAM? And I guess my question is do people say LFAM, or am I the only one that reads it that way?

Peter Zelinski  06:44

Looks like LFAM. Let's go with it.

Jodee McElfresh  06:46

We're going with LFAM. How large do you need to be, to be the L in LFAM?

Peter Zelinski  06:51

To be the L in LFAM? Yeah. So as you say, Stephanie engaged on this question. Here's what she said. An extrusion printer like a BAAM, big area additive manufacturing, or an LSAM, Thermwood's term, I believe, large scale additive manufacturing, is obviously large, Stephanie wrote, being the size of a small room. But where's the line? Cincinnati Incorporated had a machine at a show that they were calling the MAAM, medium area additive manufacturing, smaller than the BAAM. But still pretty big when you compare it to a desktop extrusion printer. I would say it extends beyond extrusion, but that kind of means putting different dimensions around each process. Something like an SLM 800, or EOS M400, she's citing two metal additive machines has a small build box compared to a lot of extrusion machines, but they're big for powder bed fusion. Are they large format, arguably yes. And I've seen them referred to as such. End quote. Khalid Rafi of ASTM, he jumped on to that exchange. And he noted that with metal, DED also gets to really big format, like these large format extrusion machines. Robots can get you there. A company like Ingersoll Machine Tools also offers what I think is the very biggest metal 3D printing machine. So watching this exchange, thinking about this question, where are, where are the breakpoints in machine size? Where does the L begin in large format? So I'd argue, yeah, there's no formal definition. But, I think we're all sharing an intuitive sense of where the machine size breakpoints are. And I think it has to do with differences in the way we physically interact with the machines. So I'm going to argue there are maybe four fundamental size zones for additive equipment. So I'd say desktop machine is something you could sit at a table and be working with it, then one up from there is standalone machines. And then one up from there, let's just call them big machines. And we're at the size now that I think Cincinnati had called medium from their perspective, but I'm thinking of machines, where if it's making a part at the full size of its build volume, likely you can't lift the part. Or if you can lift it, you have to spread your arms wider than your shoulders to pick it up. So it's a machine, so big to me is big relative to the scale of our bodies. And I'm thinking also about like a Fortus machine from Stratasys. And then one up from there is these large format machines, which can engulf us entirely. Machines that are building size or room size and and we do see various instances of that out there. And and I guess in saying that, I think about how the exercise of filming The Cool Parts Show kind of breaks in similar ways. There are certain parts where they're, they're so small, we're holding it with our fingers instead of our hand and the camera has to come in close. And then there are other parts we bring in where we're wrestling with it a little bit, because it's so big. It's blocking the view. And it's like almost getting in the way. And then there are other parts we have to travel to because they're so big. And yeah, we did an, we did one episode where we were sitting inside the printer with the part it had made.

Jodee McElfresh  10:23

Large format is Pete and Stephanie can fit inside the machine.

Peter Zelinski  10:27

Okay, yeah, I'll accept that metric. The co-hosts of The Cool Parts Show can fit inside.

Jodee McElfresh  10:34

Sticking with the large theme, someone named Luai Kurdi, he founded a company called Print4D in Prague. He posted a photo on Instagram of this concrete 3D printer that's equipped with a KUKA robot. And the robotic arm isn't the interesting thing that caught my eye. Instead, it's this pedestal, this platform on which this robot and the print nozzle stand. It looks like the company created a mod for its own 3D printer to allow for taller printing. And when I was checking out their website, Print 4D's website, it looks like the company is doing concrete printing of columns, walls, all these things that might get tall, I guess too when I'm thinking about this pedestal, it just reminds me of when I need to reach something up high and to go tall, I sometimes just put on a pair of boots or a pair of shoes with a heel rather than lugging out my step stool or climbing onto the counter. Similarly, Print 4D pursued this seemingly simple solution. Rather than changing up the specs of the robot, they just gave it a boost. Put some heels on it.

Peter Zelinski  11:37

Yeah, heels for a robot, you're saying? Yeah. So we've left LinkedIn, we're on Instagram now. And again, we'll link to all of these posts. So you can see what we're seeing in social media. Print 4D. So this is a company doing concrete 3D printing, offering technology for that, for construction in the area of Prague. And the design of this system looks really cool. So there's this concrete extruder on the robot and the extruder ends in this long tube so that the whole robot plus the tube like it looks like the bill of an ibis. And from what we've learned in some coverage we did with Oak Ridge National Laboratory about their efforts to develop concrete 3D printing systems. Concrete is a hard material to use, it presents flowability challenges that you have to wrestle with and, and I wonder about the progress Print 4D has made with this system in in overcoming those challenges. So robot 3D printing, we've seen this not just for concrete, but for polymer, for metal. And yeah, this robot is on a platform. So a robot, robots and 3D printing go together. A robot is a great pre-existing device for depositing material. And pre-existing device, as I say, robots have been around longer than additive manufacturing. And they have wonderful range of motion. And the shoulder quote unquote, of a robot arm allows it to pivot down below the floor, if it's sitting on the floor and the elbow, quote, unquote, of a robot arm leaves enough reach still to kind of in some cases, reach past itself and again, reach past the barrier of the floor if that barrier is not there. So the result of that is, if you just do the simple step of putting the robot on a pedestal, you increase its overall range of motion, and you increase the height of the structure it can build from from the floor all the way up.

Jodee McElfresh  13:54

I'm wondering now that I'm looking at this picture again, I'm curious how they made this platform, how they made this pedestal. It looks like it's made of steel, but I'm wondering if it was printed.

Peter Zelinski  14:04

That one doesn't look printed. It's like it's just a simple geometric boost. But the same idea, for example, we've seen this at Lincoln Electric, which uses robots for wire arc additive manufacturing in metal, and yeah, with some of their systems, they get started by 3D printing the base that the robot then sits on to do additional 3D printing.

Jodee McElfresh  14:28

Post number four, Catalysis Additive Tooling posted a video on Instagram, and it's highlighting this thermoforming tool that looks like it's made out of two main parts. It stood out to me because the company says that they worked with the customer to create a common base but then these multiple top configurations that can be switched out as needed, and this approach to modular tooling ended up saving the customer some money. Additive manufacturing, it offers so much potential for customization and special shapes that can save physical resources and money in some scenarios, but in others like this, using that customization as needed can actually make the most efficient part.

Peter Zelinski  15:09

Yeah. So this video on Instagram, Darrell Stafford of Catalysis Additive Tooling, I'm looking at this tool that he's showing there. And I'm making some assumptions here that I think I'm safe in making. I know that Catalysis makes use of binder jetting oftentimes to produce tooling. And that looks like what this is, specifically, binder jetting of silica sand infiltrated with resin to get the strength needed for the tooling. And it also looks to me like both parts of that two-part tool that we're seeing here, both parts are 3D printed, that wouldn't necessarily have to be the case for this to work, this idea, but I think that's what we're seeing here. So here's what I love about this. So additive, almost always we're thinking about assembly consolidation in additive, it can, it can very readily handle very complex geometric forms. So let's just give it something crazy complex by taking what used to be a sub assembly and merging it all together into one 3D printed piece. Additive's really good at that. But this is tooling. And this video, this example illustrates why with tooling, sometimes the better way to go is to break the tool apart, break it in multiple pieces. If you're making a series of tools, a family of tools that's maybe used in the same process for a similar family of parts, you're going to use each of those tools, just one of them at a time. So why not look for the commonality from tool to tool, which parts of the geometry are the same from tool to tool, and then break each tool design at that point, so that you only have to make that common common element, the common base in this case, make it just one time. And then the part of the geometry that varies you can swap it out from tool to tool.

Jodee McElfresh  17:07

I guess like switching out drill bits?

Peter Zelinski  17:09

Yeah, yeah. The, like, I'd say that's comparable. All of them need the same motor of the drill to spin. So yeah, just change the business end.

Jodee McElfresh  17:21

All right, Pete, let's take a break. I need to see if I got any notifications. When we come back. We'll cover a few more posts and comments that have stood out in our additive manufacturing newsfeed.

Stephanie Hendrixson  17:33

This episode of the AM Radio podcast is brought to you by PTXPO, the event for the plastics industry in North America. If your business is involved in plastics processing, moldmaking or additive manufacturing for plastic parts production, this is the event for you. With more than 100,000 square feet of exhibits, PTXPO offers the latest in plastics technology. Immerse yourself in free educational sessions, experience equipment demonstrations and participate in numerous networking opportunities. PTXPO will connect you with solutions providers who can unlock the right answers for your operation. Join Additive Manufacturing Media and sister brands Plastics Technology and MoldMaking Technology for PTXPO 2023. The event takes place March 28 through 30 in Chicago, Illinois. Find more information about attending, exhibiting or sponsoring this event at plasticstechnologyexpo.com.

Peter Zelinski  18:28

We're back. I'm Pete Zelinski. I'm here with Jodee McElfresh Additive Manufacturing Media. We're talking about social media. We are devoting an episode of the show to just looking at, talking about stuff that caught our eye in social media. Before the break, we were on LinkedIn and Instagram. Now we're gonna go to Twitter, specifically a Twitter exchange involving our colleague again, Stephanie Hendrixson, who just let me say, you should follow her on Twitter. Stephanie is active in social media, but she's particularly awesome in Twitter. She Stephanie is awesome lots of places. She is active in Twitter. She shares a lot of interesting insights there. She's very positive. So follow her on Twitter. You'll learn something and feel good doing it. Stephanie's handle AM_StephanieH on Twitter.

Jodee McElfresh  19:26

That's right. I'm still waiting on my follow back from her. So the tweet exchange that Pete is referring to on Stephanie's feed is this. Enrico Gallino posted a video of a display case of customer parts produced by the company Ricoh 3D. Stephanie asked Enrico if he had any favorites among this display case, and he called out a device that looks like a Nerf gun. It's used in hydrographic surveying. He shared a link to the case study about this part. It's, it's easy to read. It's really interesting, especially if you're into marine environments. So you saw this post. Was there anything that stood out to you, anything that caught your eye from this video?

Peter Zelinski  20:04

Yeah, so Stephanie's interacting with Enrico Gallino of Ricoh in the UK, and the post on Twitter, it's just like this video pan through a display case of their parts. And yeah, to your question, a different thing caught my eye out of that pan, and I explored a little bit what it is. So I learned the, the component that caught my interest. It's a part for future engineering developments for their micromist atomizer, system for dust control. Reading a little bit from the information that they put out there, Future Engineering Developments. The rotating atomizer head uses centrifugal forces to convert water into mist with very uniform droplet size. Control of the droplet size is achieved by adjusting the atomizer speed, enabling, matching the droplet size to the application. So this version of their Micromist Marvel, they call it, has increased atomizing capacity up to six liters per minute. And there are only two wear points in the atomizer. And this is thanks to a design that uses, as they say, state of the art manufacturing techniques. Like I wonder what that state of the art technique could be. But yeah, so this is a 3D printed component that is enabling this very precise misting system for dust control. It's a tweet, so it doesn't say much, I'm assuming looking at this, this is selective laser sintered. From Ricoh, the information that I see they shared, it's polypropylene. And 3D printing let them get a low weight for the strength that they were trying to achieve. They said they were able to reduce the weight of this atomizer component by 50 grams compared to nylon 12, or the equivalent that it would, would otherwise be made out of. And polypropylene gives it a high chemical resistance that gives this material an edge in this application that streaming lots of fluid into the air.

Jodee McElfresh  22:11

And you said that this is for dust control, is this dust from, what kind of material?

Peter Zelinski  22:17

So yeah, there's there are lots of industrial applications where maybe it's a dry grinding process that puts dust into the air, could be ceramics, could be wood, could be working with stone. But it's also true there are warehousing type facilities where just moving product around puts a lot of dust into the air and a way to control that is basically put little droplets into the air that help pull that dust back down.

Jodee McElfresh  22:47

Are these on the commercial market because I might know of a house that could use some dust mitigation. That would be my house.

Peter Zelinski  22:55

We got that.

Jodee McElfresh  22:58

Okay, we're on to post number six, and our colleague Stephanie Hendrixson, whom you're now following on Twitter, she created a video about hot isostatic pressing, or HIPping, and how it's used with metal 3D printed parts. Just a quick recap, HIPping it's a treatment that uses heat, pressure and time to create a uniform microstructure in the material. And for powder bed parts HIPping helps with issues like porosity, layers not adhering properly and thermal stresses that hang around after the print. We posted this video on social media and Kenneth Meno commented on our LinkedIn post. He said, I wonder if vibration of the powder bed between layers would also benefit powder-based AM.

Peter Zelinski  23:41

This is what I love about social media is being able to exchange ideas so easily. So my first thought about Kenneth's question. First of all, I don't know. I think that vibrating a particulate to get more compaction to reduce the volume of it, I think that works best when there are dissimilar particle sizes, and in additive we're going for consistency of the particle size. I don't know that vibration would contribute much. I also don't know the impact of introducing vibration to a precision machine like, like a laser powder bed fusion system, but I'm saying I don't know a lot. So like, I wonder, let's just put that out to anyone who's listening. We'll link to this post. Jump on if you know anything about vibration as an aid to better consistency of outcome in laser powder bed fusion.

Jodee McElfresh  24:34

I look forward to seeing what kind of responses we get. Kenneth, we'll let you know. Pete, I know you're dying to ask, What's the frequency, Kenneth? Okay, so onto post number seven. About a year ago we published a Cool Parts Show episode about 9T Labs 3D printed composite bracket for this hinge on a helicopter. Recently, our sister publication CompositesWorld published an article that included info from a subsequent study on this bracket. Both pieces had some feedback on cost. Our Cool Parts Show episode, the comments were a bit more skeptical. But CompositesWorld they had some comments that were a bit more enthusiastic. And there was someone who was just completely surprised that this 3D printed bracket could pretty much match the performance and be half the cost of its steel benchmark.

Peter Zelinski  25:25

Yeah, they got, they got pleasant surprise at that. So 9T Labs, they 3D print a preform. And their process allows for, for a very precise engineered placement of the fiber. And then there's a high pressure step that uses tooling and it consolidates the printed part to its final form. Yannick Willemin of 9T Labs, he wrote the article that, Jodee, you're referring to about this process for CompositesWorld, referenced that same part, it is as strong as and lighter than the machined steel part that it replaced, and that much of it kind of gets a universal acceptance. But it costs less than that machined part. So the study they did on the economics of this, it focused on a thousand parts, 3D printed composite, versus machined steel. On The Cool Parts Show, we did this extremely nonscientific load test to confirm its strength. We basically bolted the steel bracket and the composite bracket to either end of 1,000-pound beam and suspended it from the ceiling and showed how both brackets could, could do the job. But yeah, the the cost question, how much does a 3D printed part cost? When you assert that it is cost effective, or even a cost savings? Yeah, everybody turns into auditors and you get you get questions. And what are you really assuming about the material cost? And what about performance in the field? On our YouTube page, we did get one commenter who pointed out the composite 3D printed part actually doesn't have to be painted. So there is actually a savings to 3D printing that isn't being figured into the analysis. What I see from this is, people assume that additive does amazing things and it's always more expensive. That assumption is out there and it's pretty much locked in in some places. And I guess my thought is, that assumption won't last. So this particular bracket, whether the bracket is more or less expensive today, actually, it's not the issue. The bigger issue I see is three years from now, five years from now, which manufacturing operation technology will have made the greatest gains in terms of improving cost effectiveness? The, the advance of additive's performance efficiencies and economic efficiencies, it is going to open the window of applications where additive's able to deliver reasonable cost along with its other benefits.

Jodee McElfresh  28:17

Okay, my final social media offering today is something kind of inspirational. We published Tim Simpson's final Additive Insights column. He began writing it six years ago. And his final entry recapped the ways that he felt AM has progressed since his first column. And Avi Reichental commented on that post. Avi said, progress is measured by how far we have come from whence we have been, not just how we measure ourselves individually and collectively against our own bold expectations. I think Avi's comment, which I'm going to get printed on a poster with a mountain in the background, is, it's worded in an inspirational and creative way, but really, it's just a practical, down-to-earth point. It's like he's knocking on everyone's forehead saying, Hey, forget the hype. What are the real improvements that this industry, that additive manufacturing has made possible that legitimize that hype?

Peter Zelinski  29:18

So there's a lot here in this post, this exchange on LinkedIn. So Tim Simpson, professor of additive manufacturing Penn State University, friend of ours, friend of the show, he has been writing a monthly column in Modern Machine Shop magazine, sister publication. We also post his column on the Additive Manufacturing Media website. That column in Modern Machine Shop magazine is coming to an end. He's not going anywhere. We actually have him appearing in upcoming episodes of this show, AM Radio. He's going to be part of the Formnext Forum event we're putting together in August in Austin, Texas, but in this final installment of the the run of this column that he's been writing about additive for Modern Machine Shop magazine, he, he took that opportunity to take stock of how much has changed in additive since he started writing that column six years ago. And the speed of the technology has advanced the size, the design tools, the material options, standards, the the definition and clarity of standards has advanced, it's, all taken together, it's huge. It's amazing how fast this technology is moving even while there are plenty who say that it's not living up to expectations. Avi Reichental, he is the founder or co-founder of various enterprises in and around additive manufacturing. Nexa3D, for example, he very gracefully says something I want to say a little more forcefully. It is foolish, and maybe even a little ridiculous to measure something by the most extreme predictions made on its behalf. Like do you measure your career by how far you've come in your career? Or do you measure it relative to what you said you wanted to be when you grew up when you were eight years old?

Jodee McElfresh  31:18

If that's the case, then I have failed because I do not run an ice cream shop.

Peter Zelinski  31:23

Yeah, or astronauts. We're not all astronauts. Which reminds me, which reminds me, related to that, astronauts. Velo3D, maker of additive manufacturing technology, maker of laser powder bed fusion systems. So they put out this graphic, spacecraft, Launcher's orbiter craft, and this is a satellite transfer platform, it rides up on a rocket then detaches from the rocket and it carries the satellite to its proper orbit level in space. In January, it went up on a SpaceX rocket, one of these orbiters, and the parts on it, many of the parts are made through additive manufacturing. Velo3D put this out there proudly, because their machines made these parts and eight different part numbers that they showed that could only be made practically through additive manufacturing. And so this image points out thruster manifold propellant tanks, baffle injector, there's this really complicated bracket, you always need brackets, but it, additive manufacturing is making possible a whole lot of what we think of as the commercial space industry, this this entirely new industry. So again, looking at this six-year time horizon, like Tim Simpson suggested, who would have known six years ago that we'd be sending a vehicle into space with this many additive parts? In this conversation, we've mentioned The Cool Parts Show a couple times, and I guess I'm, I'm seeing something similar there in the parts we have the opportunity to talk about there. We've always focused on end use parts, we've always focused on parts that are pretty close to ready for installation into the system that they're meant for, end use components, but proof of concept has always been okay, it hasn't been a rule that it has to be out there. But lately, the subjects we're covering on the show are parts that are out there, parts that are in production. So that was the case with the latest episode on this, this fitting that stops cavitation downstream from, from ball valves. So there are 600 of these components out there in various facilities and 600 parts and counting out in the world now. The next two episodes that we have coming up I happen to know are cases just like that, additive parts that are in full production and already out there. So yeah, we've, we've come a long way in a short period of time. Thank you, Avi for your, your quote about that.

Jodee McElfresh  33:57

Yeah. Sincerely. Thank you, Avi, for that prompt to discuss some real, tangible examples of how AM has progressed. And we will continue to keep tabs on additive manufacturing's progress, and what suppliers and users are accomplishing. You can keep tabs with us by following us on social media. We are Additive Manufacturing Media. We're on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube. And I think we'll do another episode like this, so tag us in your posts, your comments, pictures, videos, and maybe we'll discuss them on the show.

Peter Zelinski  34:32

Yeah, tag us. I think we will do another episode like this again. It's fun just to have a conversation about things that are catching our eye in social media, catching our interest. So, thank you for listening. I'm in another podcast as well, a sister podcast, Made in the USA, all about American manufacturing. Find it wherever you get podcasts. If you liked this show. If you like AM Radio, please subscribe, even give us a rating if you'd like. Thank you for listening.

Jodee McElfresh  35:02

AM Radio is recorded with help from Austin Grogan. The show is edited by me, Jodee McElfresh, and Stephanie Hendrixson. Our artwork is by Kate Bilberry. AM Radio and Additive Manufacturing Media are products of Gardner Business Media. Located in the Queen City, Cincinnati, Ohio. I'm Jodee McElfresh. Thanks for listening.