1

Where can I find designs for an open-source stand mixer?

I'm generally looking for small-scale, industrial-quality kitchen equipment that's open-source. I'd prefer a set of machines that share the same motor (the most expensive component) in some universal or modular way.

The best example of a kitchen powerhouse that has multiple uses is a Stand Mixer, which has a very powerful motor and multiple modular attachments so that it can be used in many different ways.

Photo of a Stand Mixer
A stand mixer is a kitchen tool with a very powerful motor and modular attachments for mixing, kneading, beating, whipping, etc. Attribution: blandinejoannic

Bonus points if the motor for this open-source stand mixer (or universal kitchen machine) can also be configured for use as a food processor, blender, grinder, and juicer.

Has anyone released a kitchen stand mixer under an open-source license?

Michael Altfield
  • 246
  • 1
  • 6
  • “Industrial quality” would suggest reliability… which likely wouldn’t be the case for something home-built. If you’re looking to save money, I’d recommend looking to business auctioneers in your area (as restaurants go out of business quite often), or places that sell used / refurbished gear. (I’m still kicking myself for not bidding on that 12qt Hobart 20 years ago) – Joe Sep 01 '23 at 20:16
  • @Joe in my experience, when I make something it's much more reliable than buying from a corporation. Open-source hardware is often far, far more reliable than their proprietary counterparts because of an emphasis on durability & repairability (as opposed to profit motives that tend to champion designed obsolescence) – Michael Altfield Sep 01 '23 at 20:19
  • A commercial stand mixer that uses the same motor for many attachments is the Kenwood Chef. I have a few accessories, some of which are also common with my food processor. I don't know if anyone has reverse engineered and published the (quite simple) mechanical interfaces, but it could be a starting point. These things normally use cast housings/frames, which would be hard to replicate. Mine looks quite repairable, though I haven't needed to - motors tend to be fairly standard and the other parts are robust – Chris H Sep 01 '23 at 20:27
  • More reliable than a Hobart mixer? Cheaper, maybe, but those things are tanks. You should probably be looking for an old model that you can fix up. Your ‘profit motives’ argument is a relatively new thing, as stuff from 30+ years ago is built to last. – Joe Sep 01 '23 at 21:35
  • 3
    I don't think "open source" is the term you want here. It sounds like you want reusable modular components that you can repair yourself. While that shares a lot of the values of open source, it's not the same thing (I'm a board member of the OSI). – FuzzyChef Sep 02 '23 at 03:23
  • 1
    @ChrisH My mother has a Kenwood that is at least 45 y old, which has a fitting for a food processor and meat grinder on the top rear. I think model Chef A701 from a quick internet search. Used regularly (most weekends at a guess, possibly more) and rarely needed servicing. I think gears are wearing a bit now, but it could just be grease degrading in the gearbox. Most more recent ones use nylon gearing, so don't last as long, but still highly serviceable and repairable. – bob1 Sep 02 '23 at 03:24
  • @bob1 mine must be nearly 20 years old. For the last 3 or so years I've been making bread twice a week with no apparent change in performance. I looked at the food processor attachment, but it was cheaper to buy a standalone food processor, that itself has a juicer, grating discs, etc. as well as the blender and nut/spice/coffee chopper/ grinder that fit both – Chris H Sep 02 '23 at 08:12
  • 1
    @FuzzyChef you've perhaps seen some of the open source lab hardware designs, released (I think) under OSI-appropriate terms, with all parts, circuits and software published under open licences. I've come closer to contributing a couple of things myself, but couldn't justify the extra work to get to publication. That demonstrates an actual open source design would be possible. But it would be rather pointless for the kitchen - more expensive than a commercial kitchen product for not much greater serviceability. – Chris H Sep 02 '23 at 08:17
  • The 'older' wet grinder my mom can, other than the injection moulded shell could be fixed by the average backyard mechanic. Its not open source as much as designed for repairability. There's a few thing I'd change but most of those machines are literally a simple speed controller, a mains voltage motor, and a bunch of injection moulded parts. – Journeyman Geek Sep 02 '23 at 12:28
  • @FuzzyChef "Open-Source" is very definitely the term and criteria that I want to use. Licensed under [CC BY-SA](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/) or a compatible license would be ideal, but anything with that meets the [OSHWA definition of Open Source Hardware](https://www.oshwa.org/definition) is acceptable. The hardware being licensed open-source is far more important than design aspects like reusable modular components -- because if it's open-source then anyone can release a modified design that has these properties. – Michael Altfield Sep 02 '23 at 12:47
  • @bob1 I vaguely recall they switched from brass to nylon cause if there was an issue and it got bound up, it would shred a cheap/easy to replace gear and not an expensive motor. – Journeyman Geek Sep 02 '23 at 12:51
  • @ChrisH might be referring to hardware like this [Rotator Mixer and Shaker](https://certification.oshwa.org/us000050.html), which is licensed under CC BY-SA – Michael Altfield Sep 02 '23 at 13:06

1 Answers1

0

Does not, and will not, exist for most home kitchen appliances.

First, a lot of kitchen appliances are purely mechanical, such as mixers, blenders, and crock-pots. While theoretically manufacturers of mechanical devices could embrace open hardware design principles, there is no incentive for them to do so. Their overriding concern is limiting purchase cost, since that's the overriding concern of customers, and adding any extra design process would interfere with that.

Similarly, most kitchen appliances that have electronics are far too driven by cost concerns to take any extra steps or support an ecosystem of hacking. Microwaves, for example, are treated as disposable even though they could be repairable.

Certainly someone could create an open-hardware, public design kitchen appliance, like a "Framework Laptop" of mixers or air fryers. But they haven't, mostly because there would be insufficient market for customers who were willing to pay 2x to 3x as much for the open product.

FuzzyChef
  • 58,085
  • 18
  • 142
  • 218
  • This is not a useful answer. As an open-source hardware manufacturer myself, I can assure you that there is a market for OSHW. Anyway, why do you assume that someone will only design something if they can profit from it? Also, many OSHW devices end-up costing significantly less than their proprietary counterparts. That is one benefit to collaborative design, and many consumers are aware of this. – Michael Altfield Sep 02 '23 at 21:24
  • You asked a question; just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean it's wrong. If you just wanted answers you liked, you came to the wrong place. – FuzzyChef Sep 02 '23 at 22:30
  • This does *not* answer the question, and it includes many false statements. – Michael Altfield Sep 03 '23 at 01:15