New - Makerbot Replicator 2

CAD files, DXF, IGES, STL, Blender, whatever.

Intellectual property can be duplicated from a picture. You can infringe on IP from just seeing it.

@thetenter: I disagree about the DIY machines being at the end for innovation. I see this as a wide open playground.
Ask Johann about Rostock. That concept, although borrowed from past works, is fresh.

In an open source community, you give others the right to copy your idea, not necessarily use your data.
People share their data, in various forms, and that helps the less CAD capable or resource limited inventor.

The thermally controlled build chamber is the key right now. Look at the state of the products coming out versus commercial units.
The tilting dual extruder head is also still protected. The Mojo will have a dozen cool features.

Stratasys would likely defend most of their 100's of claims/patents, if a person was to be threat or start making serious money.
Competing products can be eliminated using lawyers.

Even if Makerbot has started patenting ideas, a big player can "picket fence" their competitor, which constrains them to a narrow definition of their own claims, so they can't evolve their claims and are stuck in that single iteration/generation. Picket fencing is a defense and an offense. It's done all the time by specialist lawyers.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2012 08:15AM by davew_tx.

solid works and inventor files are probably the worst, "here you go here's my 'open source design' for XXX"... oh sorry you need a cad package costing hundreds possibly thousands to do anything with it"

in my experience if you send a solidworks or inventor file to a cnc machine shop, most of the time they'll have trouble opening it,

dxf,stl, are very universal file formats everything can import and export them, you can generate tool paths from them in 99% of all the cam software out there,

sketchup . .. I'm not even going to go there... no blender qcad and openscad i can model anything i want quickly,





Weedz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > here is where they've released the source for
> the
> > mk7 extruder, now unless you have a solid works
> > package you can't do squat with it, yeah.. i
> know
> > there is a viewer, yes i know there are a
> couple
> > of pdf files in there.... the drive gear isn't
> one
> > of them, not all machine shops in Australia have
> a
> > copy of solid-works or are willing to take
> > solidworks files,
> >
> > .sldprt .slddrw .step are not drawing/common
> cad
> > files and they aren't a source , at least not
> one
> > the average person in bugger all of a budget to
> > begin with can actually open,
>
> I think what you are trying to say is right but
> youre putting it wrong, Solidworks or Inventor or
> Unigraphics is the ONLY way of giving a 3D model
> in a opensource way. As STL is not a filetype you
> can alter or do whatever you want. You could say
> use google sketch up or smt but why would that be
> needed if you have solidworks. I have it and if i
> would give away my models i would give the
> Solidworks file with it so you can truely adept to
> to whatever you want.
>
> so dont comment that those are not common CAD
> files because in fact they are. Google sketch up
> just needs a import way for those files. I dont
> like sketch up for instance, i tried to alter a
> file from someone in SU but it failed missarably
> as there are no references like SW has.....

A if a machine workshop cant open a step file they can stop working. I work in a rapid prototyping workshop and all we use are inventor and Unigraphics. And yes from customers we ask STL files but only if we do not need to alter something in it.
You prefer blender openscad, but have you ever tried sending a openscad file to a machine workshop?


Like i said a dimensionless file like STL has imho not much to do with real opensource. Altering a STL file is not doable, but if you know a way to do so pls let me now :-).......
So then you want them to change their software to example Blender because then you can open it? sorry but thats just too much to ask.... I can understand what you mean by it but if you had a business then you would'nt do that either....

If you need something converted from Solidworks just let me now i can convert it for you no problem, thats why we have a community.


I still agree with the rest

Weedz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A if a machine workshop cant open a step file they
> can stop working. I work in a rapid prototyping
> workshop and all we use are inventor and
> Unigraphics. And yes from customers we ask STL
> files but only if we do not need to alter
> something in it.
> You prefer blender openscad, but have you ever
> tried sending a openscad file to a machine
> workshop?
>
you don't end openscad files to machine shops, you export to either an stl obj or dxf file and send that...

believe it or not there are plenty of cnc machinsts around who still to this day don't even have decent cam software outside of things like cambam or ancient copies of things like enroute, a lot of them write gcode by hand, and are so tight getting them to spend $1 on a piece of cam software is like asking them to walk on water, protoype places are a bit different, production machine shops are a pain to work in, the second last place i gave up and used cambam and openscad for everything, and this was for 3 full sheet tekcell routers, the look on the service guys face when he saw what i was using was priceless, what bugged me was when customers would send in a jpeg of what they wanted from mspaint , which meant it had to be totally redrawn and changed repeatedly afterwards to get things right, needless to say openscad was handy to have on my laptop,

out of the hundred of files i've been sent very few of them have been STEP, and usaully after a quick email back explaining we could open that format, we'd usaully get somthing else, pretty quick, the only drama i ever had was when a customer sent a ENR file which is an enroute file and insisted that we could open it because we also had enroute, what the boss didn't tell them was that it was a very old copy and that actually running the program usaully involved a series of reboots which also involver the routers being interupted becaue the spooling software was alo running on the same machine...

a lot of these new formats are yeah great but only if you've got the software to open them, and if that software works


>
> Like i said a dimensionless file like STL has imho
> not much to do with real opensource. Altering a
> STL file is not doable, but if you know a way to
> do so pls let me now :-).......
> So then you want them to change their software to
> example Blender because then you can open it?
> sorry but thats just too much to ask.... I can
> understand what you mean by it but if you had a
> business then you would'nt do that either....

stl is hardly dimensionless ,and altering it is actually quite easy, with a little 30mins of basic training on blender editing stl files is actually quite easy to do, i'm not aking makerbot or anyone to change their software,
just that if anyone wants to release somthing by all means include inventor, solidworks.. whatever proprietry format they like, but it would be nice to have at least the files in a commonly usable format as well, almost all the software packages will do, it takes all of 11seconds to export them and people like me can stil open them,

>
> If you need something converted from Solidworks
> just let me now i can convert it for you no
> problem, thats why we have a community.

if you can grab and convert the solidworks files in this to stl or obj, last time i tried on a work copy of solidworks, i got all sorts of errors with the filament drive pulley file and a few other files, the problem i had with using the work copy of solidworks was that i had really restricted net access an email size limit and usb ports disabled, so i couldn't get the files i needed of the pc again,

[www.thingiverse.com]



>
>
> I still agree with the rest

thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Weedz Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > A if a machine workshop cant open a step file
> they
> > can stop working. I work in a rapid prototyping
> > workshop and all we use are inventor and
> > Unigraphics. And yes from customers we ask STL
> > files but only if we do not need to alter
> > something in it.
> > You prefer blender openscad, but have you ever
> > tried sending a openscad file to a machine
> > workshop?
> >
> you don't end openscad files to machine shops, you
> export to either an stl obj or dxf file and send
> that...
>
> believe it or not there are plenty of cnc
> machinsts around who still to this day don't even
> have decent cam software outside of things like
> cambam or ancient copies of things like enroute, a
> lot of them write gcode by hand, and are so tight
> getting them to spend $1 on a piece of cam
> software is like asking them to walk on water,
The stoic machinists I always reference when dealing with the CNC world and they give me the runs.

I guess that Mkaerbot will have to change their About Makerbot page...

Quote

makerbot

Name: MakerBot Industries
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Registered on August 19, 2009
Last seen 11:20 pm

We are a company that builds open source 3D printers. We also are the people that run Thingiverse. We're here to do awesome things and want you to be a part of it.

Should probably read "used to build open source 3D printers".

by the end of the year it probably will, if it' there at all

I still do not get it. How is it able to print on glass? Are they suggesting any coatings? OR are they pre-coating the glass with something? If yes, what coating can it be?

Weedz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so dont comment that those are not common CAD
> files because in fact they are. Google sketch up
> just needs a import way for those files. I dont
> like sketch up for instance, i tried to alter a
> file from someone in SU but it failed missarably
> as there are no references like SW has.....

Exactly. If I want to design an open source printer, why should I be confined to using something like Sketchup? It's like saying that if I design an open source project it must not use any tooling that not everyone would have access to, like a laser cutter or CNC mill.

---

Help improve the RepRap wiki! Just click "Edit" in the top-right corner of the page and start typing. Anyone can edit the wiki!

peddiparth, it's not glass. It looks to be acrylic, based on machining marks on the edges. If that's the case, and they are printing on acrylic un-heated build plates, then hmmm, I mean, we were telling people about using acrylic, and even selling them on our website like 6-8 months ago.

[shop.seemecnc.com]

thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> solid works and inventor files are probably the
> worst, "here you go here's my 'open source design'
> for XXX"... oh sorry you need a cad package
> costing hundreds possibly thousands to do anything
> with it"
>
> in my experience if you send a solidworks or
> inventor file to a cnc machine shop, most of the
> time they'll have trouble opening it,
>
> dxf,stl, are very universal file formats
> everything can import and export them, you can
> generate tool paths from them in 99% of all the
> cam software out there,

Last machine shop I worked at used Solidworks almost exclusively. STL is useless if you want something machined to high tolerance, or want something that can be easily modified. Solidworks files can include necessary tolerances for each area, as well as other information such as tapped holes.

You are correct though in that many machine shops are still in the stone age, especially the ones that manufacture for cheap. They generally won't have access to higher end programs like Solidworks.

---

Help improve the RepRap wiki! Just click "Edit" in the top-right corner of the page and start typing. Anyone can edit the wiki!

How would I take a Solidworks file to my CNC, for instance, in a machine shop? If STL is that bad for tight tolerances what are they using?

I'm glad solid works has the capability, but i still cannot open them with spending a lot of money on propriety software,

in the case of the mk7 extruder, it's really a C*** of a thing to do, people have been asking makerbot since the day it was uploaded for it in a different format and so far nothing, solid works is good in the professional arena, but the files aren't any good for sharing an opensource project

stl has a capability to definedemensions down to 0.001 of a Millimetre if your scale is 1:1,
this is the scale pretty much every piece of cam software defualts to anyway,

the down side is you don't have things like layers, you don't have text... boo hoo

thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stl has a capability to definedemensions down to
> 0.001 of a Millimetre if your scale is 1:1,
> this is the scale pretty much every piece of cam
> software defualts to anyway,
>
> the down side is you don't have things like
> layers, you don't have text... boo hoo
Thought so.

Thank you.

Weedz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like i said a dimensionless file like STL has imho
> not much to do with real opensource. Altering a
> STL file is not doable, but if you know a way to
> do so pls let me now :-).......

Materialise's 3-Matic is the best solution available. It's very capable.

Of course if you're at an RP bureau running serious volumes of parts, odds are you have a copy of Magics. You can do quite a lot with Magics if you take the time to learn the tricks. Sure, its not like editing a STEP file in Solidworks, but for most of what an RP bureau needs to do (fix, thicken, offset, boolean, cut, etc) It's extremely useful.

thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stl has a capability to definedemensions down to
> 0.001 of a Millimetre if your scale is 1:1,
> this is the scale pretty much every piece of cam
> software defualts to anyway,
>
> the down side is you don't have things like
> layers, you don't have text... boo hoo

No, the really big down side is that STL doesn't understand circular arcs. Having to interpolate arcs into polygon segments is what makes STL unsuitable for high precision manufacturing. The a proper way to do it is to have the software understand arcs and produce G2 and G3 codes to machine those directly.

ttsalo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > stl has a capability to definedemensions down
> to
> > 0.001 of a Millimetre if your scale is 1:1,
> > this is the scale pretty much every piece of
> cam
> > software defualts to anyway,
> >
> > the down side is you don't have things like
> > layers, you don't have text... boo hoo
>
> No, the really big down side is that STL doesn't
> understand circular arcs. Having to interpolate
> arcs into polygon segments is what makes STL
> unsuitable for high precision manufacturing. The a
> proper way to do it is to have the software
> understand arcs and produce G2 and G3 codes to
> machine those directly.


yes and no, most of the gcode interpreters out there simply break down the arc into segments anyway, even the big ones do it, however, it's not so much of a problem if your cam software can detect those arcs and use the g2 and g3 commands, which most of them do, most machine shops don't like going smaller than a 0.1mm tollerance anyway which is well within the limit of stl,

in this particular case we're talking about a few small blocks with a tollerance on them of about 0.1mm stl is fine for that kind of thing, and in any case there will probably be an accompanying dxf file anyway,

when you're talking an opensource thing and riding on the opensource license, releasing proprietry formats isn't nessarily a bad thing however they would have known at the time that only the lucky few would have been able to open them, and should have exported them to other formats even if it is just for viewing purposes,

My only issue with STL is that use triangles to get the job done instead, and every 3d person knows this, of using quadrangles. Use of quads you can easily manipulate the model with ease with triangles your are sunk and the more there are the deeper you will go when sunk.

Dark Alchemist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My only issue with STL is that use triangles to
> get the job done instead, and every 3d person
> knows this, of using quadrangles. Use of quads you
> can easily manipulate the model with ease with
> triangles your are sunk and the more there are the
> deeper you will go when sunk.

WHAT? It makes no difference from a mesh modelling perspective and most mesh modelling programs can convert triangles to quads and back without much issue.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 06:39PM by Sublime.

---

FFF Settings Calculator	Gcode post processors	Geometric Object Deposition Tool Blog
Tantillus.org	Mini Printable Lathe	How NOT to install a Pololu driver

Sublime Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dark Alchemist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My only issue with STL is that use triangles to
> > get the job done instead, and every 3d person
> > knows this, of using quadrangles. Use of quads
> you
> > can easily manipulate the model with ease with
> > triangles your are sunk and the more there are
> the
> > deeper you will go when sunk.
>
> WHAT? It makes no difference from a mesh modelling
> perspective and most mesh modelling programs can
> convert triangles to quads and back without much
> issue.
Want to bet? I have models that were in STL and not a single program out there can convert all triangles to quads and every 3d modeler knows this that are worth their weight in salt. Many a time the 3d modelers have to redo the entire model by hand because of the mess of triangles. Blender is the best triangles to quads algorithm there is but it even leaves behind a mess of triangles that kills it and the more triangles there are the more it leaves behind.

Always model in quads and no harm will come to the model but STL converts it to triangles and with 6 million triangles you ain't fixin' that puppy.

IGS saves in quads and if the original model is parametric nurbs or done right in quads it will save a 1:1 model that can easily be changed but triangles to quads is asking for a hellish ride.

Dark Alchemist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sublime Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Dark Alchemist Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > My only issue with STL is that use triangles
> to
> > > get the job done instead, and every 3d person
> > > knows this, of using quadrangles. Use of
> quads
> > you
> > > can easily manipulate the model with ease
> with
> > > triangles your are sunk and the more there
> are
> > the
> > > deeper you will go when sunk.
> >
> > WHAT? It makes no difference from a mesh
> modelling
> > perspective and most mesh modelling programs
> can
> > convert triangles to quads and back without
> much
> > issue.
> Want to bet? I have models that were in STL and
> not a single program out there can convert all
> triangles to quads and every 3d modeler knows this
> that are worth their weight in salt. Many a time
> the 3d modelers have to redo the entire model by
> hand because of the mess of triangles. Blender is
> the best triangles to quads algorithm there is but
> it even leaves behind a mess of triangles that
> kills it and the more triangles there are the more
> it leaves behind.
>
> Always model in quads and no harm will come to the
> model but STL converts it to triangles and with 6
> million triangles you ain't fixin' that puppy.
>
> IGS saves in quads and if the original model is
> parametric nurbs or done right in quads it will
> save a 1:1 model that can easily be changed but
> triangles to quads is asking for a hellish ride.

You are telling me that any model can be made out of quads? Are you just pulling my leg. It is impossible to make a triangle shaped object with quads. Triangles are always needed by any and all programs that make models. It may be explained as solids but some of them are made up of three sided faces. That is a simple fact of geometry.

---

FFF Settings Calculator	Gcode post processors	Geometric Object Deposition Tool Blog
Tantillus.org	Mini Printable Lathe	How NOT to install a Pololu driver

I am telling you that even circles, I have seen it, can be made out of quads. Here, go watch this person's EXCELLENT 13 part (11 has 3 parts) modeling series on SUB-D which is just nurbs. [www.youtube.com] This is how real modelers work now some triangles are unavoidable but most models should be 90-100% quads because it is so damn easy to make a quad into a triangle but not the other way around that allows to model to remain recognizable.

The problem with quads is that they form "ruled surfaces" unless the quad is planar.
The problem with that is when you convert them to tris for say display with graphics hardware or say slicing there are two possibilities that give different results, and they are both equally correct.

Yep, I do agree but I know in Hollywood they use quads and very little tris and while they do not need to be accurate you would be surprised at what is CGI these days. Avatar there is a helicopter interior shot and at the last minute the director hated two switches and wanted them turned into flapper toggles instead of the metal style. Well, instead of reshooting everything they CGI'd just those two toggle switches using Cinema4D at a huge cost savings. That took some part of accuracy.

The thing is students are being taught to model in Quads at the CG departments and universities because quads offer so much more than what a triangle can offer plus only video cards (for some strange reason) clings to triangles so even when you shoot a quad down its pipe it internally changes it to a triangle.

Fact is you hand someone a quad and they can manipulate it very easily but hand them the same thing with triangles and it becomes a mess. Another sad story is that nurbs despise triangles which is all that ugly STL gives.

Oh, something else is that while your STL will have ugly faceting if you choose a format that outputs in quads and you made the model in quads it will look smooth as a baby's butt with far less geometry to worry about manipulating. Hence the IGES format.

Now, with CNC's and 3d Printers I just don't see a need for triangles either because the software driver, just like the video card drivers, should handle a quad and do with it (make G-code) what it needs to transparently.

thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> believe it or not there are plenty of cnc
> machinsts around who still to this day don't even
> have decent cam software outside of things like
> cambam or ancient copies of things like enroute, a
> lot of them write gcode by hand, and are so tight
> getting them to spend $1 on a piece of cam
> software is like asking them to walk on water,
> protoype places are a bit different, production
> machine shops are a pain to work in, the second
> last place i gave up and used cambam and openscad
> for everything, and this was for 3 full sheet
> tekcell routers, the look on the service guys face
> when he saw what i was using was priceless, what
> bugged me was when customers would send in a jpeg
> of what they wanted from mspaint , which meant it
> had to be totally redrawn and changed repeatedly
> afterwards to get things right, needless to say
> openscad was handy to have on my laptop,
>
> out of the hundred of files i've been sent very
> few of them have been STEP, and usaully after a
> quick email back explaining we could open that
> format, we'd usaully get somthing else, pretty
> quick, the only drama i ever had was when a
> customer sent a ENR file which is an enroute file
> and insisted that we could open it because we also
> had enroute, what the boss didn't tell them was
> that it was a very old copy and that actually
> running the program usaully involved a series of
> reboots which also involver the routers being
> interupted becaue the spooling software was alo
> running on the same machine...
>

maybe its the country then... all subcontracter we have can open step atleast.
I just like solidworks and think there is nothing wrong with publishing youre stuff as what file type you want.


But i see i have to take a look at blender some more, converting stl files would be gr8.
i will take a look at that file you posted

in this case it's ... "here you go here's our opensource extruder, but if you want to use you need a $XXXXX cad package..., but we've met our our obligations for the license",

end of the day it can be the best format under the sun, but it's worthless to those open-source community if it requires a proprietry package to read it, its no different from being closed source in the first place,


It's a bit like what I've doing with my gcode interpreter for pic 18fXXX , to get the features and floating point accuracy i need i've had to write it using a compiler that does what i want, at the expense that if anyone wants to compile it themselves they would have to buy the compiler, although we're not even talking $100,

What we need is for all of the packages to start using that open source successor to stl but for some odd and stupid reason, that only they know the reason why, they haven't done it.

---

_______
I await Skynet and my last vision will be of a RepRap self replicating the robots that is destroying the human race.

thejollygrimreaper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if it requires a proprietry package to
> read it, its no different from being closed source
> in the first place,

And if i open that Solidworks file and dump out a PDF with the drawings, or even redraw it in OpenSCAD and repost that somewhere?
Seriously, people, get off your high-OpenSCAD-horse. No one uses OpenSCAD for anything serious. Get used to the fact and get with the programme.

OpenSCAD is neat and cute and it appeals a lot to my inner developer (which, currently and incidentally, is my day job).
But it's like unscrewing bolts with a hammer and a piece of string. Don't mistake convenience for sinister closed-source motives...

Open SOURCE means the program the design was made in. NOT what program is most accessible to everyone. It is not the designer's problem if YOU aren't willing to spend the $$ to use what they have provided.

For example, all CAD requires a computer, but if I am too broke to buy a computer, I wouldn't dare bitch at someone releasing their .scad files instead of printing me physical dimensioned blueprints.

The majority of things on Thingiverse aren't even source files right now. Many people only supply a .stl. Almost always, a .stl file came from an original blender, Solidworks, 3d point cloud file, etc. Stripping the original creation data to produce an easily read .stl file is actually the opposite of open source. It's like giving someone a compiled version of a program. It may be possible to modify said program, but not to the same extent as if the uncompiled code was available.

---

www.Fablicator.com