Friday, June 5, 2015

What is 3D Printing? Why in Public Libraries?


The steps involved in 3D printing are numerous and depend upon the kind of 3D printer one is using. For our purposes we will discuss the most common way of 3D printing without considering handheld 3D, though the basic processes by which a 3D item is created with these pens is basically the same. Nor will we cover 3D printer calibration, loading and unloading of the printable 3D material, or printer heat up and cool down times. I have extensive experience with 3D printing. As a result the description(s) below do not rely on outside citations. 

Assuming we have a 3D printer available for use, and before any such printing can be accomplished, we first must have an actual 3D file to print. These files can be obtained in a variety of ways – by downloading them from a website, by scanning them with a 3D scanner (both fixed and handheld) or by creating a 3D file in one of the many available software programs designed for 3D printing. Regardless of how the file is obtained, the means by which a 3D file is constructed is universal and requires some kind of computer aided design (CAD) program or 3D modelling program - similar to what an architect would use. These files are most commonly saved in a stereo-lithographic (STL) format. These design programs allow for creating files within a three dimensional grid environment with all the requisite geometric, size and spatial considerations therein. Back to the architect analogy the file works as a kind of blueprint that can be uploaded into the brain of the 3D printer. Think of it like this. Rather than drawing a picture of Mickey Mouse and sending it to a traditional printer and getting your flat printed copy, you are creating a Mickey Mouse statue in CAD that your printer can manufacture into a real world object. 

In its most basic sense, 3-D printing is the ability to take various hard but pliable and malleable materials, heat those materials to their viscous melting point, and then run the material through a thin heated extruder (much like a pen tip) in their liquefied form and onto a flat surface. Once upon this flat surface the liquefied material quickly cools and hardens, resulting in a very thin layer of the material working as the base and support for the next layer. The 3D printer works in 3D space on an X-Y axis giving it the ability to rise and fall, slide side to side and back and forth, and skip areas per the CAD file design, all while constantly moving and creating new, thin layers of material. The 3D printer is also capable of creating stanchions and supports during the printing phase to account for any areas in the CAD design where the 3D object being printed may not have adequate support. The material most commonly used for 3D printing are various kinds of plastic resins. However, any material that can be melted down, maintain its chemical properties and re-solidify can be 3D printed, such as metals and even chocolate.

Now that we have a basic, cursory understanding of 3D printing, the question might arise – what does this have to do with public libraries? Why are public libraries increasingly implementing this technology? An argument can be made that 3D printing (and by extension the burgeoning concept of the “makerspace” or “digital lab”) is another means by which the library fulfills its duty of providing educational opportunities to the public. The purpose of 3D printing in the library space isn’t as much about the finished object, as it is the processes involved getting to that finished object. 3D printing involves planning and calibration, thoughtful design, mathematic calculation, software manipulation, execution and various hands on activities with interactive content. Still, questions persist as to the appropriateness of 3D printing in public libraries. As a result, information scholars are looking more and more into these questions to determine if 3D printing is a viable, tenable and sensible choice for the funds and focus of public libraries. Should public libraries be involved with 3D printing?

Literature Review

Scholarly research and academic literature on this question of 3D printers in public libraries suggests that the effort of public libraries in this area is a justifiable and positive one. Lisa Kurt and Tod Colegrove show how previous public library adoptions of technology, such as computers, scanners, copiers, and audio and video production equipment are adequate precedents for the justification of 3D printers ("3D Printers in the Library," 2012). Dixon and Ward (2014) find 3D printing helps promote self-guided learning and exploration (p. 18). 3D printing affords public library patrons early exposure to a new technology that patrons have communicated to the researchers had inspired the patrons to be more curious and try something different (Dixon & Ward, p. 19). Scholar Jason Griffey (2014) finds 3D printing in public libraries in keeping with the their perpetual mission as ” an engine of democratization of knowledge and information,” and is in keeping with the public library’s long history of providing technology to their patrons (p. 6). Greg Landgraf (2015) has discovered through conversations with public librarians that 3D printing is a great introduction to STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) educational efforts that are an increasingly focus of library programming. Tracy Wong (2013) finds the public library a “natural place” for 3D printing and other makerspace activities because they help foster connections, collaboration and community within the library and continue the trend of libraries reinventing themselves and their purpose while simultaneously adhering to the library mission of information and inclusiveness (p. 34). Wong (2013) finds 3D printing in public libraries especially helps students develop numerous areas of expertise and ways of critical thinking while confronting “multi-faceted challenges” (p. 35).

While most of the available literature is positive in regards to 3D printing in public libraries there are some caveats. Researcher Moorefield-Lang (2014) finds the staff excitement over introduction of 3D printing does not always match positive implementation. Lindsey Halsell sees 3D printing as the next essential service, but as such requires a deeper consideration of establishing library and user policies which currently remain largely unexamined (“3D Printing and Libraries,” 2013). Chad Sansing (2015) concludes 3D printing is a worthwhile venture for most public libraries, but concedes they do not make sense for smaller systems with budget limitations. 

Use & Applications

In keeping with much of the findings in scholarly literature, my own professional experience with 3D printers has shown 3D printing to be a very valuable library tool. 3D printing has become central to much of our “digital lab” programming, giving participants the opportunity to see, learn, and interact with a technology they might otherwise not have been exposed to. 3D printing fosters creativity and collaboration, inventiveness and trial and error. We are able to use 3D printing as another gateway technology to STEMs programming, which public schools throughout the country are increasingly emphasizing.

I mentioned elsewhere during discussion in MLIS 7505, but it is pertinent to how we are concretely using 3D printing in our libraries today. Recently, we used a 3-D printer, 18 laptops and 18 iPad Air 2 tablets to host 24 “GEMS” – Girls in Engineering, Math and Science at one of our libraries. We are doing similar programming throughout our system. The 3D printer was central to the exercise. The GEMS were tasked with using modular and CAD software and challenged to create a unique file in a robust and complicated design program. None of them had used this software or a 3D printer before. They were asked collaborate separately on the available laptops and tablets yet to work towards a common goal - to create a 3D object with working parts. It is the kind of interactive experience suitable for a science camp. The goal was to foster problem solving and scientific thinking with the result being a 3D generated artifact. Each girl and group were eventually able to accomplish their goal. The GEMS and the parents gave us overwhelmingly positives reviews for the program. They were actively learning with the results of their learning an actual, physical product.

As a practical matter we have also been able to use our 3D printing to create competitions among staff concentrating on team work and were able to use the 3D printers to create the prizes for these competitions. The key to 3-D printer utilization is education and outreach. 3-D printing must be promoted as a learning tool, an educational tool and as a kind of scientific discovery. That is one of the main selling points of 3-D printing. It lets anyone and everyone get their hands dirty in the process of manufacturing and creation. Rather than a cog in the process, each person can be an originator and inventor, testing ideas and designs and equations and angles to create something with real tactility. 

Concerns & Caveats

Some of the primary challenges with 3D printing are start-up costs, budget overruns and equipment failure. 3D printing isn’t necessarily cost prohibitive, but it does take some substantial resources to get 3D programming started in public libraries. With 3D printers it is often wise to pay more for the expensive models than to settle for a lower or mid-range printer. The reason for this is that even the best 3D printers have their problems, mostly hardware related. My own professional experience and the reading of online grumble threads indicate that there is quite a bit of frustration with many 3D printer manufacturers. This frustration seems to increase exponentially among lesser 3D printer models, but this is an anecdotal conclusion only. Also, that is not to say the more expensive models don’t find their detractors. Indeed, it is often the sheer expensiveness of some models that infuriates users when the hardware fails, the belief being the more expensive the model of printer, the more reliable it should be. That is not always the case. In the last year alone we have had four separate failures of our 3D printers at a repair cost of over $600. There are also the plastics and resins that the printer uses, as well as supplemental software and hardware costs that must always be considered.                            

Conclusions

The literature and my own extensive professional experience indicates that 3D printing is definitely a valuable resource for public libraries to pursue if they are financially able to do so. 3-D printing isn’t about the finished product. It is about learning to create the finished product. It is about creating files in CAD, tweaking them, uploading them, working in a literal 3-D space with all its manifold considerations and calculations and creating a real thing that confirms either ones success or failure in design. It is writing a poem where the subjectivity of the art is replaced by a mass of ruined, melted plastic that says in no uncertain terms “wrong, try again”. Or produces a perfect little bauble, a sphere or a working widget, that validates ones time, effort and precision. When I think about the value of learning about 3-D printing I sometimes equate it to patrons checking out a book on “Screen Writing for Dummies” or “Learn HTML5 in 24 Hours.” We’d never denigrate people using those materials as resources for self-learning and discovery. The goal of our 3-D effort isn’t the worthless bauble that is the result. It is the invaluable learning to create that worthless thing, which makes that bauble not worthless at all. What we are doing with our maker spaces isn’t simply letting people show up saying “make me Mickey Mouse”. We are saying - you do it, you make Mickey Mouse, and having them make it – loading the software, creating the file, calibrating the hardware, loading the machine, monitoring its process and letting them fail to try again. 3-D printing is definitely a worthwhile investment for the public library.                                               

References

 

Dixon, N., Ward, M., & Phetteplace, E. e. (2014). The Maker movement and the

Louisville free public library. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 54(1), 17-19.

Griffey, J. (2014). The case for 3D printing. American Libraries, 45(9/10), 22.

Halsell, L. (2014, June 28). 3D printing and libraries: Facilitating access for the

next essential service. Retrieved from http://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/blogs/the-scoop/3d-printing-and- libraries/

Kurt, L & Colegrove, T. (2012, July 17). 3D Printers in the library. Retrieved from

http://acrl.ala.org/techconnect/?p=1403

Landgraf, G. (2015). Making room for informal learning. American Libraries,

46(3/4), 32-34.

Moorefield-Lang, H. (2014). Makers in the library: Case studies of 3D printers

and maker spaces in library settings. Library Hi Tech, 32(4), 583-593.

doi:10.1108/LHT-06-2014-0056

Sansing, C. (2015). Worth the hype?. School Library Journal, 61(5), 15.

Wong, T. (2013). Makerspaces take libraries by storm. Library Media

Connection, 31(6), 34-35.

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

Content Managment System Interview

I interviewed the head (name omitted) Digital Services Librarian for the Cobb County Public Library System (CCPLS). He is a graduate of the University of Tennessee and has been with CCPLS for 12 years. He is relatively new to his position, only five months in, and thus inherited the WordPress Content Management System that he is now using and maintaining. My interview subject had previously worked in an E-resources support role under the previous Digital Services Librarian. While he did not then interact extensively with the CMS and the previous management tools used by CCPLS, he did have enough cursory exposure to them to understand the history of CMSs at CCPLS and was able to adapt to their current CMS rather quickly.
The following is a transcript of a recorded interview with the CCPLS Digital Services Librarian on May 29th, 2015.
What was it like working with WordPress when you hadn’t before?
Well, whenever you take on a new position you are expected to learn new things. I’ve never been afraid of that. I knew there would be a learning curve. I was lucky to have a great relationship with the previous web designer, so I pretty much knew what to expect. I was able to access WordPress and make little emergency updates if needed. She would call sometimes if she didn’t have remote access and say “can you change something for me” [in WordPress], and she’d walk me through it. I learned a lot from her just due to professional osmosis, I guess you could call it. If you pay attention to what those around you are doing. If you’re curious and they kind of include you, you can learn a lot just by asking questions.
Professional Osmosis?
You know what I mean. Just by being around people, overhearing conversations, listening, asking questions. You can learn a ton of stuff. Our work stations were all very close. We worked really well together.
Did you have any part in your library system choosing WordPress for your CMS?
No. It was all (name omitted). We used [Microsoft] Frontpage 2000 for years. We use Sirsi/Dynix for our OPAC, but our own content was created in Frontpage. I remember those days. It wasn’t pretty. (Name omitted) was the one who led the charge to update to Adobe CS4 around 2010. That’s how long we were using Frontpage. We used Dreamweaver and other CS4 applications until last year when we migrated to WordPress. I didn’t have any part in that. I didn’t use Dreamweaver once…
You were using Dreamweaver and shifted to WordPress?
I didn’t…
Dreamweaver is considered more powerful, isn’t it?
I’m not so sure about that anymore. At least the CS4 version. It was very expensive, by the way. I don’t know all the details but WordPress seems to have advantages over Dreamweaver. It’s easy to use. It’s free. It loads quickly. Even I can use it, so that’s something. CS4 is more of an HTML editor. Maybe newer versions of Dreamweaver are more flexible and user friendly. For our purposes though we realized that WordPress does everything we need it to do. It may not be as pretty as something built with a powerful HTML editor, but we really don’t need that. WordPress gives us what we need. 
What has been your experience using WordPress? What are your thoughts on it?
It’s great. It’s fine. One of the big advantages besides being fast and free is you don’t have to hire a web designer. Or BE a web designer. I saw what (name omitted) went through teaching herself Dreamweaver. There were days she was tearing her hair out trying to get something to work that refused to. WordPress was never like that. The migration was very easy. My experience has been great. It’s a true WYSIWYG. I have some personal experience with them. You can learn code for WordPress, but you don’t need it. I prefer to learn code because it allows for greater flexibility. But if I need help I can ask other staff to make changes and updates without worrying that WordPress will be too confusing for them.
Do you have other staff members helping you with WordPress?
Not yet, but that is the plan. When I say other staff I mean we will be recruiting and teaching certain staff the basics of WordPress. Maybe more than just the basics. That can help in a pinch. The goal is to have personnel available if I am not. If we need something changed immediately like a winter weather closure announcement it will be nice to have options.
What kind of learning curve do you think staff will have?
That depends [upon] who is doing the learning. Seriously. We have a lot of amazing people in our system. There are probably people on staff who already know WordPress better than I do. I’m sure of it. We want to teach people who are excited about technology and aren’t afraid of anything. We have a lot of those people here.
We’ve touched on it a bit already. What do you think are the advantages of using WordPress for your CMS?
Well, as I mentioned cost and ease of use are important. Something else that I don’t think I mentioned was the control over content you have and the support from WordPress itself. Not to get side-tracked but one of the concerns I have about WordPress is that they are considered vulnerable by many hackers so WordPress itself is under constant hacker attack. Just last month many Georgia library websites using WordPress were hacked by some Mujahadeen outfit out of Algeria. They took over our homepage with this scary graphic and ominous music. They had our homepage for about 15 minutes. They got some other libraries too. Catoosa and Cherokee and some others in the state. That’s bad. Here’s the good part. WordPress was immediately on top of it, was able to shut down the attack, created a patch for the exploit for the attack and had us back up and running in an hour. So, support was surprising. To nutshell it – ease of use, loading speed, cost, support, functionality, ahhh…easy to maintain, ability to share it in the cloud, learning curve…
I won't even ask about the Mujahadeen.
Yeah, that was crazy.
So, you’re happy with it?
Yeah. I think we all are.
 Do you think your system would ever hire an official web designer? There’s all this talk about having IT professionals on library staffs.
We have never hired a web designer. We have always recruited staff to whatever we are using. The previous administrator working in Frontpage was a library assistant who took classes to learn it, not some professional web designer. We make due here. I think if you work in a library long enough you sort of become an IT professional. We have in house IT support as it is for our network and our OPAC. But we have always been able to recruit from inside. We might not have the slickest interfaces but we do alright here.
Thank you very much for your time and for answering my questions. It’s been enlightening. Especially the osmosis.
You’re welcome. Yes, ask questions, listen and don’t be afraid to learn new things and to try new things. You never know what it could all lead to.
The WordPress Content Management System allows the Cobb County Public Library to remain nimble and responsive with their in-house web content. The current Digital Services Librarian stressed ease of use, content control, cost, cloud capabilities, loading speeds, technical support, and short learning curves as benefits to using WordPress. Downsides to using WordPress include vulnerabilities to remote hacking and functional limitations with appearance. CCPLS use WordPress as a portal to their hosted OPAC and their many online cloud hosted e-resources. Working with their OPAC provider CCPLS has been able to request certain customizations that give a more seamless feel between their hosted WordPress content and their other hosted interfaces. WordPress is a new CMS for CCPLS and has provided a mostly positive experience and landing spot for their library system.

An area that CCPLS appears eager to investigate is shared administrative rights within their CMS. The Digital Services Librarian made a point of mentioning the wide array of talented personnel that CCPLS can draw from. One point that was omitted from the interview that he made was that this talent wasn’t restricted to just younger staff as is often the assumption when using and implementing newer technologies. Indeed, the DSL was very complimentary towards the tendency of CCPLS staff to be near-universally curious about and supportive of the rapid technological changes librarianship has undergone.
He told me that there are oftentimes playful competitions among staffers in areas like e-resource patron support, flier design and self-taught areas of technology (personal web design, 3-D file design, etc.). By this he detailed how staff will share on their system wide email a particularly tricky technology related patron issue they were able to solve or a new web design technique they employed on a staff blog or personal webpage. Such widespread emails are constant reminders to the rest of the library staff that there are new concepts and interfaces and programs that staff are out there learning. It is also a reminder to staff to stay curious and keep on their toes or be left behind. It might seem potentially contentious and the DSL admits there are a few stubborn holdouts who resent “the showoffs”. But for the most part this playful back and forth within the entire staff has been well received and has led to many staffers who might have been resistant to innovation and change to get on board and have fun. It has also resulted in a surprisingly high level of digital competency among the staff, something the administration is increasingly stressing at CCPLS.


Link to Google Doc