How do machines get on the reprap.org front page?

I have noticed that all of a sudden new machines have popped up on the front page. I am wondering what determines if a machine is worthy of front page status? The Wallace is not really design complete. The MakerGear PRUSA is very similar to the standard PRUSA .. same with the MendelMax. It is just a new frame.

Don't get me wrong, I am excited by all the new improvements and that is what the WIKI is all about. But who makes the call about what is on the face of the site?

And speaking of the WIKI .. more a more things are not being documented in the WIKI and the WIKI page just points to the private page of the project. What happens if a site dissapears? The WIKI should be kept up and the repository for info on all these projects.

Just some thoughts.

... this actual changes are 'work in progress' - can change anytime, when Adrian and the coreteam finds a new consensus, that suites the actual situation better ...

---

Viktor
--------
Aufruf zum Projekt "Müll-freie Meere" - [reprap.org] -- Deutsche Facebook-Gruppe - [www.facebook.com]

Call for the project "garbage-free seas" - [reprap.org]

James good question, I am responsible for the change.

We are trying to find a balance for the front page. Right now the "idea" is.

-If the project has replicated several times outside of the original project

-Project must be under a free like beer licence, no non commercial crap

-Project must be RP Part focused

There are about 10 Wallace in the wild (Hunderds if you count the Printrbots, which I think you should).

I personally know of 5+ people who have built MG Prusa from his github.

I know of 5+ people who have built Reprappro also.

I would rather a RepRap Wiki Front page with 10-100 design options, than one that has only the Sells Mendel and Huxley on it.

If you can of a better way to address this issue I am all ears.

---

repraplogphase.blogspot.com

I like the idea of including more builds on the main page. However im not too keen on having the smaller variants on there.

Something like ;prusa mendel, mendel, huxley, wallance and darwin (imo its nice having the original reprap on there).
The other prusa based machines just make it more confusing for a newbie.

Guide line wise something like:
*must have full or at least 75% complete documentation
*follows the reprap idea/concept
*must be at least a full step (similar to the mendal to prusa mendal gap) away from the other "offical" builds

It would be nice to have an adrian approved tag.


Just my 2p.


Ps. Typing this on my phone so sorry any typos or grammer issues

---

My Reprap blog

jds-reprap.blogspot.com

And that "full step" and "75% documentation" lines are going to be pissers.

Prusa is just a upgraded sells!

Mendelmax uses Prusa X axis with no change!

RepRap Pro Huxley is just a down sized Prusa!

I don't want to have these converstations.

---

repraplogphase.blogspot.com

Thanks spacxula. That is what I was looking for. It is much clearer now that you laid out some basic qualifications.

Thinking more on it. Having machines and varients on the front page that have actually been reproduced by a number of people besides the creator gives you a menu of possibilities. My suggestion would be to make sure there are clear specs to differentiate machines and at least a reasonable amount of build documentation. You may want to put a short blurb on the front page stateing what machines on the front page represent. Just some thoughts.

Agree, your more than welcome to edit the hell out of my test page [pacexula_try" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">reprap.org] with your ideas and I will push them to the main page.

---

repraplogphase.blogspot.com

To my mind, we should have two concepts that I will call Designs and Variants. A Variant is a printer where the majority of parts can be swapped with the printer that inspired it. For example, for all practical purposes all stock Prusa parts can be used on a MG Prusa, and vice versa. The same is not true of the MendelMax. It was inspired by the Prusa, but is a fundamentally new design. Certainly SOME parts can be shared, but that is a benefit, not a disadvantage, since it allows advances in the parts that are shared (mainly the X axis) to be used without modification. My goal was to take the best parts of the Prusa and make an arguably better printer (some people disagree, but that is not relevant to the present discussion), so retaining compatibility with the Prusa's strongest parts should be encouraged.

With the current concept, all you have to do to get your commercial printer featured on the home page is change a couple parts out from the standard Prusa with some other parts you find on Thingiverse and suddenly you get your own new RepRap. I think that is a bad plan and will only encourage people to create new "designs" that are not really new and will lead to even more confusion for new people than already exists.

Here is what I suggest: Printers that truly change from a previous design, ie the majority of parts are not compatible with existing printers, get featured on the home page, provided they follow the basic rules hat Spacexula defined above. On each of those listings, in addition to the existing five bullet points, add a "Variants" bullet that points to a separate page listing all the different models of those printers, each of which have their own box like the home page. Those pages, unlike the home page, should be open so anyone can add their own variant. By that definition, everything currently featured on the home page would qualify except the MG Prusa, which would be a variant of the Prusa.

The current system is unwieldly and will create massive confusion. I truly think it is unsupportable in the long run. I think this proposal balances the goal of exposing different designs and variants, while also minimizing the confusion new users will have.

Please note, I am an "interested party" as the designer of the MendelMax, but I honestly feel this (or something close to it) is the most sustainable way to go forward. I have no problem at all with the six printers that are currently featured, and if I thought it would stop there I would not raise these objections, but I do not believe it will. I think we need a better system in place, or we will be dealing with massive confusion.

One other thought...

I would also add one additional rule that may be unmanageable, but I think should be in place: For designs from a specific seller, we need some system to remove sellers that get a bad reputation in the community. Otherwise I foresee people creating new printers, starting a web shop, collecting a bunch of money than not delivering the goods... Under the current system, we could be giving prominent free advertising to scammers. Obviously no seller will ever please every customer, so we need to allow for the occasional irate customer, but some system to remove sellers who are not living up to the standards of the community should be in place.

I added the step line just to try to encourage some variantion. Its just that without something like that you just end up with 5 different versions of (prusa) mendel with only small changes.

As for the documention line i mean builds with overview, bom, build guide and troubleshooting/tweaking pages.
Or atleast the first 3 (hence the 75% i posted).
This was just to avoid having machines on the front page which cant be built via the wiki.

They were just me thoughts. Im still a newbie and can remember how confusing it was starting off so i was coming from that point of view.

---

My Reprap blog

jds-reprap.blogspot.com

JoeDaStudd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I added the step line just to try to encourage
> some variantion. Its just that without something
> like that you just end up with 5 different
> versions of (prusa) mendel with only small
> changes.

That is basically the same as my "majority of parts different" standard. Really I think the standard should be something like "the design significantly adds to the RepRap community" but I think that standard may be hard to define and even harder to achieve consensus on. "The majority of parts are different" is a more easily quantifiable standard.

> As for the documention line i mean builds with
> overview, bom, build guide and
> troubleshooting/tweaking pages.
> Or atleast the first 3 (hence the 75% i posted).
> This was just to avoid having machines on the
> front page which cant be built via the wiki.
>
> They were just me thoughts. Im still a newbie and
> can remember how confusing it was starting off so
> i was coming from that point of view.

Yes, this is exactly my concern. Really, there should be two decisions each person makes when getting started, first what deign do I want to make, and once that decision is made, they can delve into the details of which of the variants of that design are best. If we just throw 50 options up on to the home page, then it will be incredibly confusing for anyone who is getting started.

I, for one, LOVE the new front page! RepRap is very much about diversity, and this now shows off. Excellent work!

The red links also encourages the different designers and users to add documentation.

---

--
-Nudel
Blog with RepRap Comic

My opinion is that only machines that have full build instructions in the reprap wiki should be featured on the front page of that wiki.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

nophead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My opinion is that only machines that have full
> build instructions in the reprap wiki should be
> featured on the front page of that wiki.

Why? As long as the docs are licensed in an open manner, who cares where they are hosted?

Personally I chose to document MendelMax on my own site simply because I wanted a site that was easier for me to keep track of what was going on. There is too much bad information on the RepRap wiki, so I wanted the MendelMax site to be a bit more trustworthy.

That said, there is a bug in my wiki software that means no one but me can edit the content, and I really don't have time to fix it, so my current plan is to migrate the information to the RepRap wiki anyway. But such a move should not be mandatory, so long as the documentation is open.

Quote

Why? As long as the docs are licensed in an open manner, who cares where they are hosted?

Because a) if it is shown as an "official" reprap design, on the front page alongside Mendel it should be contained within the site, otherwise it just becomes a bunch of free advertising links.

b) The advertising revenue should go to reprap in exchange for you using reprap to publicise your machine.

IMHO.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

Printrbot should be on there now that its files have been released, and bring back the original Darwin!
I see nothing special about the Makergear Prusa, why is it included?
Any featured bot should be open source, and at least have a brief descriptive page on the reprap site, with links to the files needed to build it.

The Printrbot should NOT be there until there is a BOM and basic set of build instructions. All there is right now are the pictures on their Flicr page and the stls for the plastic parts. Things on the front page should have at least enough to get someone well along the way to actually building one. I know there are a lot of printrbots out there .. but they are built by the beta testers and creators .. after a number of them are built by the community from scratch with some basic documentation .. should it go up on the front page.

I still feel that at least one standard should be each machine have a summary .. specs based on a basline configuration so you can compare machines more easily.

"The first Mendel design, fully functional but mostly out of date"

I am not sure I like this statement. The first Mendel is still a great machine. I don't see why it is "mostly out of date". Yes there are new designs out there. But the Mendel is still a very well built reprap printer. I see that the others are easier to build. But I believe the original Mendel is still just as relevant as the others. A very well built, solid design that has proven itself to be an awesome machine.

Jeff

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/04/2012 02:38PM by Adventure.

Yes it is more expensive and takes longer to build but it doesn't have any major design flaws like some of its successors,

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

Sells Mendel is older, more expensive, takes longer to assemble and is terribly difficult to calibrate compared to Prusa (and others), thus it's clearly not as relevant as the new models. Yes, I've built and used both designs.

I'd say the original Mendel design belongs on a history page together with Darwin, and not on the front page at all. But there are still a lot of relevant and good RepRap information tied to the Mendel wiki pages, so it's useful to have it visible.

---

--
-Nudel
Blog with RepRap Comic

we are all looking at it from our point of view, people with a 3D printer.
but the front page is not for us. it's for them who hit "3D printer homemade" in google.

thus, the first page should make it easy for first timers.
having 10 printers to choose from isn't.

i would say on the front page you should for now only have the mendel and the prusa and then "others" without a specific printer yet

then under mendel, there should be the darwin and huckley, under prusa you should have the prusa 2, the makergear, mendelmax,...
the under others i would say the printrbot and wallece and orca and others.
once the printrbot has a full manual, i would also put it on the front page,
as it's a cheap and easy printer to build, and this is what me need to get more people starting to make printers.

also, i like the "prusa is the ford T from 3D printers" that is what people need to choose. it's what i needed over a year ago.

one more thing on the front page is a big link to this forum.
and let people know they should ask help here.
this is going to learn us what should be on the front page

Maybe the front page shoulnt be used for promotion or else it will become more about making money than spreading ideas. Take reprappro huxley. This is adrians business.

Quote

[Mendel] is terribly difficult to calibrate compared to Prusa

Why? Isn't calibration of all machines exactly the same? Simply belt pitch, pulley teeth, Z screw pitch, gear ratios, thermistor table, hobbed bolt effective diameter and retraction distance.

When I built my Mendel the prints were good as soon as I fixed a software bug in my host code. When I built my Prusa I had to fix backlash problems on Z and Y. When I built Mendel90 the first print I made was spot on.

I don't understand why people say it takes 6 months to get decent prints.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

Exactly. I have built a ton of Mendels and calibration is not that tough. I know Prusa Is easier to build, but does that make it the superior model? I think it should stay as an option for people to build if they so chose.

nophead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>> is terribly difficult to calibrate compared to
>> Prusa
>
> Why? Isn't calibration of all machines exactly the
> same?

I should have been clearer, I meant the calibration/correct build of the mechanical construction itself. Especially getting the 624 bearings to run smoothly and not have any axis bind. I never made my y axis work properly before changing it for lm8uu, and the z axis only works at very slow speed.

This might very well be due to my mechanical inexperience when building it, and I must have done something wrong several places in the process. Could I do a better job with a Sells now? Probably, but seeing how well my Prusa printed after only a couple of days of getting it together, and with next to no calibration, I'm not going to try.

Could my better experience with Prusa come from experience in the year I've been tinkering on my Sells? Again, very probable. The Sells might be a good bot, but I can't see how we can advise beginners, especially if they have little to no building experience of this sort, to build a Sells before a Prusa?

---

--
-Nudel
Blog with RepRap Comic

To make the Y axis work you simply need to have the Y bars parallel in in both planes. This isn't any different between Mendel and Prusa. The problem with both of them is the triangular prism does not ensure the Y bars are parallel because there is nothing to prevent one triangle being twisted with respect to the other. Perhaps you just were more lucky with your Prusa.

The Mendel Z axis is slower, 6mm/s compared to 10mm/s in my experience, but that has very little effect on performance as a typical layer change takes 67ms, nothing compared to the typical XY move to the start of the next layer.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

The primary complaint about my site in IRC is that I still use and sell the "Sells Mendel". I sourced parts and started printing months before I ever found IRC, as soon as people started looking at my website I had many people (some very well known in the community) being very critical saying how it was outdated and inferior and how "I had better hurry and get some prusa stuff on there". I even had some go as far as to accuse me of misleading my customers.

I have no issues with the Sells...bit more parts...bit more work. I have never had an issue with the 624 bearings running wrong and I have had very little issues with the Z axis. Granted I have never built a Prusa. I believe when I switch to a new design it will probably be the Mendel90 or Mendelmax.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.Robosprout.com RepRap Mendel parts and accessories.
Message if there is anything you need...I have more than what is listed on my site.
Located in the Spokane, WA / Coeur d'Alene, ID area.
Contact: Robosprout@gmail.com Flickr: [www.flickr.com]

I don't know how much I have to add to the discussion but maybe just to add my voice to those who have already chimed in.

1. printrbot should be the front page design for that family of bots. There are a few variants already but let's give credit where credit is due. I know some people get annoyed when files aren't released early and often, but I think the original design deserves to be there. Link variants off that if desired, or add a "variants" link to the front page below the improvements link.

2. Makergear prusa seems like it belongs in the "where to get it" links off the prusa pages or a varaint link rather than a front page separate design. I haven't looked at it in detail for the variations/improvements though so I'm not going to lose sleep about it.

3. Mendelmax deserves to be there I think.

4. I like the switch from the original huxley to the newer emaker/ reprap pro huxley.

Overall though I'm glad that more designs are on the front page. It may add a bit to the information overload of newbs, but it will also likely result in more people getting the printer they really want in the first place.

Re: Promotion of commercial designs, I don't mind as long as the files are released and open sourced. The wiki would be mostly linking to information about how to build your own anyway, so even if the design is mostly built as a kit from some vendor, the wiki really promotes the design more than the seller.

Re: Off-wiki designs, as long as these designs are open sourced I don't see a problem. These are not closed source commercial designs. Sure the original designer is likely the only one with the motivation to sell kits at first, but it's not like there is a lot of money to be made when anyone can come in and just start selling the exact same design as soon as it catches on. It seems like the wiki is currently just adequate for publishing stuff. If someone has experience and wants a better format than the reprap wiki provides I don't have a problem with that. It's still open source, it's still reprap, if it qualifies as a tested/popular design, then link it up.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2012 12:09AM by bryanandaimee.

I would like to see a section for printers that are very large. My printers are the largest out there. I use the original Mendel for my printers.
My customer service is 100% and my responce time is always same day.

Thanks

---

Jeff Christiana