Samples of a sub $2,000 printer - Page 3
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 106
  1. #41
    djnos1978 Guest

    Default

    Well I can talk all I want man. You guys are asking me to show something. I will but I would be wasting mine and your time by just talking, right?

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    817
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    609
    Likes (Received)
    541

    Default

    So we're 42 posts deep and still no mention of the mat'l the machine uses, the resolution, the working envelope.

    All we have are 3 (quality with a capital 'K') photos of a bowl with under-glow. An anemic defense for a sub $2000 printer. WHAT makes this worth mention?

  3. #43
    djnos1978 Guest

    Default

    I can but I am not here trying to sell to you guys. Seriously and even now it is confirmed you wouldn't be interested but here goes:
    Overall size: 24x22x18
    Build size: 8.75"x8.75"x8.75"
    Resolution 50 microns at 10mm/sec; 100 microns at 15mm/sec; 200 microns at 20mm/sec.
    Material used: pla, abs, nylon, flexible, wood grain, pv, pva, hips.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA, Lebanon
    Posts
    300
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    31
    Likes (Received)
    89

    Default

    Can u print us a 1" cube and take some pictures with measurements for us please? Maybe even put 1/4" intersecting holes... You would be showing us your printers capabilities somewhat I would think.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    alabama
    Posts
    163
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    262
    Likes (Received)
    9

    Default

    I'm with Nodeco. Tolerance is whats important.

  6. #46
    djnos1978 Guest

    Default

    Yes, definitely. Here is a 20mm cube picture. Attachment 137436
    I will do one with holes and measure it.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3881
    Likes (Received)
    2869

    Default

    So you're boasting half the resolution, at twice the build time ( best case scenario ), and calling that competitive??? Well... at least we now have a base line. Okay... And what kinds of accuracy is this half/twice delivering? I can overlook a few things here and there if I can at least have accurate models...

  8. #48
    djnos1978 Guest

    Default

    Read my original post please. Thanks

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3881
    Likes (Received)
    2869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by djnos1978 View Post
    Yes, definitely. Here is a 20mm cube picture. Attachment 137436
    I will do one with holes and measure it.
    Okay. Now can you post a picture of you measuring it with a mechanical micrometer? Not a digital one.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Sunny South West Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,124
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    8668
    Likes (Received)
    2493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zahnrad Kopf View Post
    Okay. Now can you post a picture of you measuring it with a mechanical micrometer? Not a digital one.

    You can cheat zero on either, why the distinction?

  11. Likes lowCountryCamo, MartyZero liked this post
  12. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1353
    Likes (Received)
    2710

    Default

    Is that solid or mostly-hollow with reinforcing structure only?

    What's the width mic to at the corners and at the center of opposite surfaces?

    How tightly can you hold a width and straightness over 6" length?

    One of the big hiccups I see from 'desktop printers' is that the makers of the machine (and the vast majority of the users I hear of) believe that the inputs guarantee the outputs. If your CAD model is right, then your manufactured part will be right. If your motors have 'x' precision than your part automatically gains that precision. This could not be more illogical and further from the truth. There are far too many variables that occur when you start adding things together and start looking at different geometry that a "hands off" "hit the green button and walk away" approach will not conform to "advertised" specifications. Hence my inquiry of whether the cube is solid or not, and whether the tolerances hold up over 6" (or however long you can fit on the bed)

    I'm sorry you seem to take offense at the attitudes but you really should develop a thicker skin if you're going to be selling machinery. Especially if you're going to come on to a forum geared toward professionals and claim that your " 'inexpensive' 3d printer can compete with high dollar ones and even beat them. "

    If I'm buying a machine, I want claims quantified and justified and proven. We're in the process of buying a new optical CMM and not one salesman I've talked to has balked at my request to inspect a part we send them and give us their results. They haven't balked at me sending them a model and saying "Can your machine do this to 'xxx' tolerance". I'm asking them to quantify their machine's performance and then asking them to prove it with a blind test. They're more than happy to comply and even gave me a suggestion on what else they can do to prove their machines. That's professionalism.

    Questioning the motivations of legitimate questions is not professionalism.

    Good luck with your desktop printers, though, I guess.

  13. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3881
    Likes (Received)
    2869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TeachMePlease View Post
    You can cheat zero on either, why the distinction?
    ... because unless it's pointed out, most people don't think of that with mechanicals...

  14. Likes TeachMePlease liked this post
  15. #53
    djnos1978 Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JNieman View Post
    Is that solid or mostly-hollow with reinforcing structure only?

    What's the width mic to at the corners and at the center of opposite surfaces?

    How tightly can you hold a width and straightness over 6" length?

    One of the big hiccups I see from 'desktop printers' is that the makers of the machine (and the vast majority of the users I hear of) believe that the inputs guarantee the outputs. If your CAD model is right, then your manufactured part will be right. If your motors have 'x' precision than your part automatically gains that precision. This could not be more illogical and further from the truth. There are far too many variables that occur when you start adding things together and start looking at different geometry that a "hands off" "hit the green button and walk away" approach will not conform to "advertised" specifications. Hence my inquiry of whether the cube is solid or not, and whether the tolerances hold up over 6" (or however long you can fit on the bed)

    I'm sorry you seem to take offense at the attitudes but you really should develop a thicker skin if you're going to be selling machinery. Especially if you're going to come on to a forum geared toward professionals and claim that your " 'inexpensive' 3d printer can compete with high dollar ones and even beat them. "

    If I'm buying a machine, I want claims quantified and justified and proven. We're in the process of buying a new optical CMM and not one salesman I've talked to has balked at my request to inspect a part we send them and give us their results. They haven't balked at me sending them a model and saying "Can your machine do this to 'xxx' tolerance". I'm asking them to quantify their machine's performance and then asking them to prove it with a blind test. They're more than happy to comply and even gave me a suggestion on what else they can do to prove their machines. That's professionalism.

    Questioning the motivations of legitimate questions is not professionalism.

    Good luck with your desktop printers, though, I guess.


    Touché
    Great points.

  16. #54
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    il.
    Posts
    6,508
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    29
    Likes (Received)
    1144

    Default

    all that does is put it Haas class not a diqualifer



    Quote Originally Posted by Zahnrad Kopf View Post
    So you're boasting half the resolution, at twice the build time ( best case scenario ), and calling that competitive??? Well... at least we now have a base line. Okay... And what kinds of accuracy is this half/twice delivering? I can overlook a few things here and there if I can at least have accurate models...

  17. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    il.
    Posts
    6,508
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    29
    Likes (Received)
    1144

    Default

    a teachable moment
    everybody wins


    Quote Originally Posted by djnos1978 View Post
    Touché
    Great points.

  18. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Williamsport, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JNieman View Post
    I like to see any and all professional-related information about 3d printing because I'm always eager to learn more about it. We contract out our '3d printing' (FDM and SLS only so far) and any time we sub things out I look at how much it'd take to do it in-house. I don't like giving away money

    However, clouding the section with hobbyist work wouldn't help this crowd any, I don't believe. The process, machinery, and challenges are all quite different between hobby grade "spider shitters" as I call them (cheap FDM plastic printers) and professional-grade SLS printers or even FDM printers. We have a casting supplier who uses a Makerbot to do 'prototype' investing castings before they're approved for hard tooling expenses. They're garbage. It makes the world hell on us because we, as the machine shop, are being held to the same geometry and tolerances of the finished part, but we're dealing with an investment casting made using a Makerbot-produced pattern. They get a .060 profile tolerance over a 6x10 area, and can't hold it for shit.

    Then we get more 'professional grade' supplier that gives us final parts used for aerospace tooling that come in and pass a .005 profile inspection with flying colors.

    I'm more than happy to discuss 3d printing. I have a google alert set for "Terry Wohlers" because Wohlers Associates is a very good source of up-to-date industry discussion about technology and business/marketing. It's not comprehensive and not sole-source, it's just a very-specific alert that doesn't get a lot of BS with it, and does bring up pretty decent journalists who tap him for commentary, as well as keeps me updated when Wohler Associates spits out another report of some kind.

    tl;dr - just because people poo-poo a hobby grade machine doesn't mean they disregard the entire process in it's entirety. You'll find plenty of people who'll shit talk a Jet import lathe, but that doesn't mean we don't think metal turning isn't worth discussion. It's just that the site is more professionally-geared and topics relevant to professionals are more valid. (there are some old fogeys who poo-poo 3d printing in it's entirety but they're just tired of seeing over-grandiose marketing bullshit and hype-men which I can't blame them for, but they are less likely to go into threads in a section devoted to 3d printing, I'd like to think)
    Yeah and either you or your supplier has no idea what they are talking about. I don't even like Makerbot but I can guarantee that machine can hold well within .060 so someone is full of it. Most of the belt driven hobby machines are using GT2 - 2mm pitch timing belts and around 16-20 tooth pulleys with 16x microstepping and 200 step motors. That works out to .0005" per step (microstep) on the 20t and .0004" on the 16t.

    It's not rocket science and the hobby machines already have motors/drivers more than capable of holding to well under .010 even with extrusion inaccuracies. The only real difference between the hobby and professional machines in regards to the motion accuracy would be the linear motion setup (strength and size of rails/rods), tensioning of the drive setup and some form of feedback and the last one is really not needed if you do the first two correctly.

    Most of the accuracy issues come from the extruder being setup incorrectly. It's a big game between gearing and speed. If you want to print accurate, you need higher gearing to allow you finer control of the extrusion. Printing with 1.75 instead of 3mm filament also gives you more control since you need more movement to extrude the same amount. Gearing hurts the speed part though and most NEMA17 motors which are commonly used do not have the torque required to extrude at high speed to begin with but to run them faster many run direct drive which reduces the extruder resolution greatly. That being said, the speed at which you encounter problems with geared extruders is quite high...way above the print speeds of Dimension/uPrint machines.

    So yeah, one of you is a liar. Even my first printer, an i2 made with threaded rod, could easily hold within .060".

  19. Likes Pete F liked this post
  20. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Williamsport, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by djnos1978 View Post
    I can but I am not here trying to sell to you guys. Seriously and even now it is confirmed you wouldn't be interested but here goes:
    Overall size: 24x22x18
    Build size: 8.75"x8.75"x8.75"
    Resolution 50 microns at 10mm/sec; 100 microns at 15mm/sec; 200 microns at 20mm/sec.
    Material used: pla, abs, nylon, flexible, wood grain, pv, pva, hips.
    Why in the world do you print so slow? Even the worst machines print around 40mm/sec... Also looking at the cube, you overshoot every corner so you should go back and work on your accerlation/jerk settings.

    Also, as you've seen 3D printing gets no love here. These guys here have to have a way to justify their $100k purchse somehow. The only real benefits I've seen to a commercial machines that I can't do myself is the dissolveable support material which is a limitation of me being in an apartment and having no way to work with the chemicals or a place to put the printer that doesn't expose me to the fumes and also some of the materials like Ultem and PC which they claim they can print reliably.

  21. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    2,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1353
    Likes (Received)
    2710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tjb1 View Post
    So yeah, one of you is a liar. Even my first printer, an i2 made with threaded rod, could easily hold within .060".
    Yup, like I said, only idiots believe gear and belt precision guarantees equivalent output.

    There's no lying to be had - we inspected their part right off the Makerbot on our Zeiss Contura and they gave us their own inspection report from their optical scanning CMM. The end customer (both the casting supplier and my company were contracted by the customer separately) wanted to see our results and our numbers matched pretty closely. It's just what they put out. The part is a casting ~5x6 at the base and, 16" tall, and a rather thinwall body. I do not at all disagree that there is 'operator error' involved. No one here on a machining site will ever say "the machine is accurate" - machines our tools. People make parts, not machines. However, there is still a level of GIGO to be understood.

    Or you can just jump to conclusions and start throwing around "liar" accusations but that doesn't go real far. If you're curious about my experience, I'll divulge, but if you just want to argue and be a cunt, there's plenty of places I can get that on the internet, that I'd rather not engage in, here.

  22. Likes RC Mech, Zahnrad Kopf, SVFeingold liked this post
  23. #59
    djnos1978 Guest

    Default

    I agree with you. I can mail these guys a perfect print with comparison or better yet a machine for free and nothing will be good enough. Have to justify that $100,000.

    That is one of the slowest settings based on what you said, "extruder". We are using direct drive with 1/16th micro-stepping but I just changed a couple machines to 1/8th.

    We are adding a second extruder for support material and are considering to include a filter system but don't know how long that will take to R&D since we have other stuff in the pipeline.

  24. #60
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Williamsport, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JNieman View Post
    Yup, like I said, only idiots believe gear and belt precision guarantees equivalent output.

    There's no lying to be had - we inspected their part right off the Makerbot on our Zeiss Contura and they gave us their own inspection report from their optical scanning CMM. The end customer (both the casting supplier and my company were contracted by the customer separately) wanted to see our results and our numbers matched pretty closely. It's just what they put out. The part is a casting ~8x8 at the base and ~5x6, 16" tall, and a rather thinwall body. I do not at all disagree that there is 'operator error' involved. No one here on a machining site will ever say "the machine is accurate" - machines our tools. People make parts, not machines. However, there is still a level of GIGO to be understood.

    Or you can just jump to conclusions and start throwing around "liar" accusations but that doesn't go real far. If you're curious about my experience, I'll divulge, but if you just want to argue and be a cunt, there's plenty of places I can get that on the internet, that I'd rather not engage in, here.
    I never said it guaranteed that accuracy but the motors and drivers are CAPABLE of it if the rest of the linear motion system is done right. Maybe some reading comprehension is in order before you go around name calling and yes I still stand by my statement. Either they have no idea how to work the machine or you are a liar, .060 is cake for even a hobby machine.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •