Is it time to buy a 3D Printer ?
78 views
Skip to first unread message
L C
Oct 13, 2012, 6:01:03 AM10/13/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
I just saw that the Makerbot Replicator 2 is shipping, I was wondering if it is time to just buy a 3D printer and make things or is all the time building one worth it? I did want to make things with it after all;-)
Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K Dimension).
Now I am not so sure.
I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not current enough.
Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
Lee
Not to long ago if you wanted one you had to build it (or buy a $20K Dimension).
Now I am not so sure.
I need a 3D printer buyers guide but one's I've come across are not current enough.
Anybody that has a comment or can point me to useful info would be great.
Lee
Triggerdog
Oct 13, 2012, 7:39:41 AM10/13/12
to CTHack...@googlegroups.com, cthack...@googlegroups.com
"3D Systems Cube review Locked-down, underfeatured Cube underwhelms"
http://reviews.cnet.com/3d-printers/3d-systems-cube/4505-33809_7-35473913.html
Triggerdog
Oct 13, 2012, 8:18:59 AM10/13/12
to CTHack...@googlegroups.com, cthack...@googlegroups.com
Interesting news.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/12/myhrvold_patent_3d_printing/
From Wikipedia a bit of info on the company "Intellectual Ventures"
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/12/myhrvold_patent_3d_printing/
From Wikipedia a bit of info on the company "Intellectual Ventures"
Intellectual Ventures is a private company notable for being one of the top-five owners of U.S. patents, as of 2011.[1] Its business model has a focus on developing a large patent portfolio
and licensing these patents to companies. Publicly, it states that a
major goal is to assist small inventors against corporations. In
practice, much of their revenue[citation needed]
comes from licensing patents from other corporations and then filing
lawsuits for infringement of patents, a controversial practice known as patent trolling.
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 6:01:03 AM UTC-4, Triggerdog wrote:
Jeff Myer
Oct 13, 2012, 9:33:07 AM10/13/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
An interesting couple of posts. The more recent of the posts incited me to chime in differently than I originally intended to Specifically, I was intending on simply putting out some quick thoughts on Make versus Buy. The linked article regarding DRM on printable items got me a bit more fired up on 3d printing from more of a philosophical standpoint.
For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end of the spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other end (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator, MakerGear M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that the higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed over the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be comparable to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison. For example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel and still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking and fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over the cash for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part of the question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the destination.
For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap up and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end the speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far more than I would have learned just following along on the internet. Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT Hackerspace machine and make the thing worthwhile.
Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price for MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be able to go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this machine. It is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine. Could I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could. For now however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I absolutely need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody else with a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that most of what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the consumer machine world.
If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical end of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became clear that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator 2, I thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing becoming accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version of a device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very "closed". I also believe that it still the open source community that is driving the state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that the availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does not, too severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that has allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing represents a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for development of new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the point of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time to look for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based open source development.
If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing? Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate interests and become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there will be a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is that an open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that can only be practically achieved in an open model.
So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d printing expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be building a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
Jeff
For the simple answer of make versus buy, I do think that the price and availability of assembled, ready to go 3d printers on the market today really drive the need to ask the make versus buy question. At one end of the spectrum, you have the SolidDoodle and some of the PrintRBot offerings available in a ready to go configuration for under $500. On the other end (of the consumer targeted machines) you have Makerbot Replicator, MakerGear M2 and others in the $1800-$2500 range ready to go. It appears that the higher end of the spectrum will get you dual head extrusion and speed over the lower end machines. The higher end machines also seem to be comparable to commercial machines with resolution and print quality.
Compare these machines to kit and diy options that are currently out there, and it is no longer as simple as a dollar to dollar comparison. For example, one can easily spend over $500 in parts for a Reprap Mendel and still need to spend significant time assembling, adjusting, breaking and fixing before an acceptable print comes out. Why not just fork over the cash for a SolidDoodle which runs out of the box. Without getting into a discussion of pros and cons of each machine, I think that a big part of the question is whether you are more interested in the journey or the destination.
For myself, the time spent getting the CT Hackerspace Mcwire repstrap up and going was invaluable in teaching me about 3D printing. In the end the speed of the machine made it practically useless however I know far more than I would have learned just following along on the internet. Incidentally, I really want to belt drive the X&Y axes on the CT Hackerspace machine and make the thing worthwhile.
Flash forward to about 2 weeks ago when I purchased a fully assembled Printrbot Jr at the Maker Faire. This machine was $399 (Special price for MakerFaire) fully assembled. The fully assembled part was a bit of mis-information as I still needed to instal the control board after unpacking the machine. After some simple set-up and calibration, I am printing some fairly decent objects. Overall, I am very happy to be able to go from a need or idea to physical item very quickly with this machine. It is, in my mind, a utilitarian machine. It is not an art piece machine. Could I tweak and tweak to get better resolution and speed? I sure could. For now however, I intend to take it for what it is and put it to work making functional pieces upon need or whim. If I print something that I absolutely need to be of higher quality, I can always send it off to somebody else with a higher quality machine or a printing service. The truth is that most of what I am interested in is more functional than aesthetic. Don't get me wrong, I am happy with the quality of the prints, they are just not currently on par with commercial machines or the upper end of the consumer machine world.
If you are still reading, I will delve briefly into the philosophical end of things. Amidst all of the discussion that ensued after it became clear that Makerbot was going closed source with aspects of the Replicator 2, I thought a lot about Open Source and what it meant to 3D printing becoming accessible to the hobbyist and consumer.
My conclusion is that the community behind the reprap project, coupled with an open source mentality did something really incredible with 3D printing. The community collaboratively engineered a low cost version of a device/technology that was otherwise quite expensive and very "closed". I also believe that it still the open source community that is driving the state of the art for low cost 3d printing forward; Not the producers of ready to print machines. With that in mind, I sincerely do hope that the availability of ready to print, closed technology, solutions does not, too severely, dilute the pool of talent and the wealth of innovation that has allowed low cost 3d printing to evolve so quickly.
On the other hand, perhaps what has happened with 3d printing represents a new evolutionary model for innovation and the breaking down of the barriers previously imposed by the capital based model for development of new technologies. Perhaps the consumer grade 3D printer has passed the point of diminishing returns for community development. Perhaps it is time to look for the Next Big Closed Technology to make Open via community based open source development.
If that is the case, then what is to become of low cost 3d printing? Will the technology state of the art migrate back to corporate interests and become more closed? I do believe that will be the case however I also believe that if it does swing too far in the closed direction, there will be a community that will open it back up. The most important thing is that an open source community continues to thrive by pushing the boundaries of technology through leveraging the collaboration and horsepower that can only be practically achieved in an open model.
So, Make vs Buy? I believe that the time has come where if you are most interested in printing objects to support your artistic or intellectual pursuits, you should buy. If you are interested in becoming a 3d printing expert and/or furthering the technology, at some point you must be building a printer or improving upon a purchased printer.
Jeff
--To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/CTHackerspace/-/MmneBmz8YxcJ.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CT Hackerspace" group.
To post to this group, send email to CTHack...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to CTHackerspac...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/CTHackerspace?hl=en.
L C
Oct 13, 2012, 8:36:47 PM10/13/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
Looking at the Makerbot Replicator 2 specs but it is a PLA machine. Not for ABS?
Jeff Myer
Oct 13, 2012, 8:54:06 PM10/13/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
Lee,
You are correct, Pla only. They are offering the following for abs:
http://store.makerbot.com/replicator2x.html
This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially seeing that pla doest glue up well.
I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been keeping word of this this limitation low key.
Jeff
You are correct, Pla only. They are offering the following for abs:
http://store.makerbot.com/replicator2x.html
This is a bit tough to get past for serious prototyping especially seeing that pla doest glue up well.
I had not taken notice of that previously. Guess they have been keeping word of this this limitation low key.
Jeff
William Saturno
Oct 13, 2012, 9:01:06 PM10/13/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
I didn't even think about that possibility. Good catch, Lee.
L C
Oct 14, 2012, 7:37:11 AM10/14/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Bill, I had to reread the material a couple times on the PLA.
Just a guess but it must make it vastly easier to make a "consumer" machine.
Still the layer thickness spec of 100 microns (.0039") has me drooling. I did read on the the makergear site that they did a Yoda build at 20 microns. I am inferring that the slicing program will slice however thin a layer that you want, and that on the computer side the current tools will generate machine paths for whatever you want, but that on the machine side it may or may not perform?
I really like the idea of a 100 micron machine. Could it be that this is a advantageous characteristic of the PLA material?
Lee
Just a guess but it must make it vastly easier to make a "consumer" machine.
Still the layer thickness spec of 100 microns (.0039") has me drooling. I did read on the the makergear site that they did a Yoda build at 20 microns. I am inferring that the slicing program will slice however thin a layer that you want, and that on the computer side the current tools will generate machine paths for whatever you want, but that on the machine side it may or may not perform?
I really like the idea of a 100 micron machine. Could it be that this is a advantageous characteristic of the PLA material?
Lee
Jeff Myer
Oct 14, 2012, 8:59:33 AM10/14/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
Lee,
I had heard tell of the 20 Micron print on the Makergear but never bothered to look around for images of the resulting print. I checked out the Makergear site and found these
http://www.makergear.com/blogs/frontpage/6591695-20-microns-i-am
https://makergear.googlegroups.com/attach/385a4f99583b6afe/yoda%20face.jpg?view=1&part=4
There also is a discussion of layer thickness in this thread that you may find interesting.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/makergear/DgSeUTcvVfU
From my perspective, I think that there is probably a point of diminishing return for layer thinness when it comes to practical proto-typing. For artistic/aesthetic endeavours the thinner the better however. I don't know what the layer thickness is that represents practical for most of my work but I am reasonably sure that I don't need 20 micron layers.
If you are at all considering the M2, I recommend hopping on IRC at irc://irc.freenode.net/makergearv2 and asking any questions you may have on there. Rick (Owner of MakerGear) is generally on IRC and is really helpful.
Hope this helps!
Jeff
I had heard tell of the 20 Micron print on the Makergear but never bothered to look around for images of the resulting print. I checked out the Makergear site and found these
http://www.makergear.com/blogs/frontpage/6591695-20-microns-i-am
https://makergear.googlegroups.com/attach/385a4f99583b6afe/yoda%20face.jpg?view=1&part=4
There also is a discussion of layer thickness in this thread that you may find interesting.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/makergear/DgSeUTcvVfU
From my perspective, I think that there is probably a point of diminishing return for layer thinness when it comes to practical proto-typing. For artistic/aesthetic endeavours the thinner the better however. I don't know what the layer thickness is that represents practical for most of my work but I am reasonably sure that I don't need 20 micron layers.
If you are at all considering the M2, I recommend hopping on IRC at irc://irc.freenode.net/makergearv2 and asking any questions you may have on there. Rick (Owner of MakerGear) is generally on IRC and is really helpful.
Hope this helps!
Jeff
jennifer anderson
Oct 14, 2012, 12:06:21 PM10/14/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
how different is the quality of the junior that you bought at the Maker Faire from the 1 you built and can you post a picture for quality reference?
L C
Oct 14, 2012, 3:08:20 PM10/14/12
to cthack...@googlegroups.com
Did some reading and I think this summarizes the layer thickness comparison. Smaller slices = finer detail = greater time to print.
| Micron | Inch | layers per inch | time per layer | Time to run part |
| sec | in seconds | |||
| 20 | 0.0008 | 1270 | 5 | 6350 |
| 100 | 0.0039 | 254 | 5 | 1270 |
| 250 | 0.0098 | 102 | 5 | 508 |
| 350 | 0.0138 | 73 | 5 | 363 |
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages