MakiBox $200 Complete 3D Printer

Dark Alchemist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
-- If the consumer wants it now, then please explain why Amazon has such success with a business model that has customers ordering things and getting them the next day, or more often, in two days. If I want to print out a recipe, my expectation is that my printer can spew it out in well under a minute. If I want a custom made snowboard from Austria, I'm willing to wait a few weeks for it to arrive.

DA- Because people get it and in our shops most brick and mortar stores don't carry nearly the inventory of what you can get from Amazon AND you don't have to fight a crowd nor use gas AND you skirt sales tax. It was already proven that internet sales took a slump for Amazon when they started to charge a sales tax everywhere. They rescinded it and went back to only charging a sales tax where they have a physical presence.

So what you're saying is that getting it right now is just a part of the equation that also includes greater inventory, lower price and taxes, and the hassle involved of going to a store. Hence getting the thing now is not the only parameter that drives consumers today.

----------
--The goal of the RepRap was to build functional machines. If some of the parts are printed, so much the better. But until we can print stepper motors, wires, and all the parts of the print head including the hot end, insulator, laser, etc., any machine is going to be limited.

DA- That is a cop out and you know it, or at least you should. What we have are people straying very far away from the goals of RepRap. More and more metal structures and less and less fabricated parts. I am not the only one who sees this as we had this discussion on the irc a couple of weeks ago and most are saying the goal of Adrian's needs to be removed.

No, it is not a cop out. It's just a realistic assessment of the state of the art and a guess at where things will go in the near future. My estimate is that we are between 20 and 100 years from being able to print a stepper motor on a printer. 20 if someone invents a new disruptive technique that changes the game, 100 (or more) if development stagnates. Again, complete self replication is a long term goal that is part of the equation, not the whole picture.

Personally, I'm a practicing physicist, and my interest in 3D printing is to build intricate parts quickly and cheaply to build experiments. Self replication has virtually no value to me directly, but I see it as a useful goal for the future. I completely disagree with the notion that it should be removed as a goal, but I also consider it a very long range goal.
----------
--Further, there is no inherent reason why filament printing can't produce great results.

DA- Want to bet? By its very nature of layering and having to be melted and the way plastic works it will never look like an injection molded part. How the powder and liquid can do it is via extremely high resolution layer height. order of .05 etc...

Yes, I would readily take that bet. But I don't want to just take your money. I wouldn't even have to make a print head, just suggest how it could be made. Or see VDX's post on the subject - he cites examples that prove me right.

You say of "the way plastic works it will never look like an injection molded part". This is patently false. We don't have the expertise to do it now. That doesn't mean it is impossible. To categorically rule out making a flat surface at an arbitrary angle with FDM implies that you have done a thorough study of the relationships between flow rate, temperature, surface tension, deposition speed, nozzle size, injection pressure, and surface to surface interactions? (There are more parameters, these are just a few.) Is it completely impossible to imagine that someone will master the complex relationship between these things and produce really smooth parts via FDM? My degrees in Physics and Engineering would bet that it's not impossible; the interesting question is it doable with less effort than a competing technology.

Melting a filament with a laser should be workable. Powder and liquid methods should also work well. And I'm sure there are new techniques that we haven't imagined yet. The question is what will turn out to be the most workable. Even watching RepRap development shows how things evolve. The Darwin's square frame gave way to the Mendel's triangular frame, which is now being supplanted by the buttressed inverted T (perhaps we should call these biT machines). If/when a better head than filament comes along, it will take over, but people will also be investing time in making filament feed heads work better than they do now.

Lasers have their limitations too. Even though one can in principle focus a laser down to the Rayleigh diffraction limit (classically), the heat will diffuse through the material, and the resolution is limited by that diffusion. Until we reach the point where we're sputtering individual atoms into specific spots, resolution will be limited by some factors (and that point is centuries away). Until then, best practices will be determined by a cost benefit analysis that is based on development time and effort, resolution, cost, and fabrication factors.
----------

-- Will people develop geometries and techniques to print light, strong panels that could replace the MDF or Acrylic on the Mendel90, Prusa i3, and other buttressed inverted T platform printers?

DA- I was talking about this but if it were to be printed in one piece it would take a larger printer to make smaller versions.

Again, not necessarily. The buttressed inverted T frame (biT) can, in theory, print out to a Y dimension that is unconstrained by the X and Z sizes of the printer. This would allow one to make rods and sheets of arbitrary length, and a structure made of these rods could build another biT machine of comparable or larger size.

For example, take a Mendel90. Double the length of the Y travel, and double the length of the bed, using 2 heaters, and a piece of glass twice as long. Now you can make rods and sheets almost long enough to build the arch that supports the X and Z mechanisms. One might need to upgrade the belt or replace it with a stiffer structure in Y to handle the extra length. Additionally, building up in Z simply requires a higher arch, longer lead screws and rods, and eventually, an enclosure to keep the work at an elevated temperature throughout the build.

Print a set of sheets, perhaps 6 inches wide, one inch thick, and 16 inches long. Use several of these to make the arch and buttresses. Use several more to construct the base. It's a lot more work than just cutting MDF or acrylic, but it is possible. And the screw holes would be printed into the material itself.

This is just one simple approach to expanding the size of the printer. I'm sure there are more elegant and accurate methods.
----------
DA- instead of a 1920's style electric toaster for a print head how about a 20watt laser focused on the material or a couple of 20W lasers focused on the material for melting it?

Well, the 1920's style toaster has the advantage that it is cheap, reliable, easy to construct, and has nearly 100% efficiency in turning electric power into heat (a tiny bit of power heats up the wires supplying current to the resistor). None of these statements is completely true for a laser. Sometimes the old methods are the best ones. KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid - for any readers not familiar with the acronym.)
----------
Bottom line, DA, the group of RepRappers, small business entrepreneurs, university professors, and makers, as a collective, are way smarter than you or me. They will find solutions to these problems as long as there is interest in solving them and money to make it happen. Saying "this can't happen" or "that can never work" is almost always wrong. Saying "this may work, but it looks like there are easier and cheaper ways to do it" is usually right, and is way more productive and useful.

Regards,
aeronaut

I would retort but it will be so long it would fill out pages.

So I will retort to the first part in this one. See, this is a generation that bitches that their popcorn takes 2.5 mins in the microwave to cook. They complain that their buritto takes one minute whereas I remember the days before the microwave oven (still prefer food not cooked in it) when anything less than 5 mins to reheat your spagehetti in the fry pan or 10 mins for the shortest cooked meal was inconceivable. So, I stand by the premise I made but I am not so egotisitical to not understand external forces that are forcing people to do other things they wouldn't normally do to get what they want. Now after they have their printer they want it now and they want it pretty.

---

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

One last thing I wanted to add is this

"Well, the 1920's style toaster has the advantage that it is cheap, reliable, easy to construct, and has nearly 100% efficiency in turning electric power into heat (a tiny bit of power heats up the wires supplying current to the resistor). None of these statements is completely true for a laser. Sometimes the old methods are the best ones. KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid - for any readers not familiar with the acronym.) "

See, I disagree because I can buy a laser, or two, that will pin point a heat source to melt the filament without any other thing getting hot. I can immediately turn the laser diodes off and the plastic immediately ceases melting unlike the toaster. The price is less than 40 dollars for that and in bulk look out. Now doing that means retraction could probably be no longer needed and no peek, or metal tubes, etc... that drives up the cost of a hot end. So, in theory, at least, the cost would be less and the benefits would be greater doing it like that AND the energy needed to melt the material should be less too.

---

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

I'm still rather impressed with the quality we currently do. And I cannot believe how "crappy" DA is making our method sound.

Some of the quality I see around here is amazing. And even on my toy of a prusa I can get some stunningly nice looking prints, especially considering that machine was a pile of parts assembled and setup by my own two hands, costing around 500$ total. I am content.

I am very very happy with the ability to create a part, bridge the gap between the digital and physical world, and the quality at which we can do it with FDM.

Maybe I'm just easier to impress.

Possibly but you can't tell me that if you print a part using FDM and use injection molding on that part when both are done you wouldn't find the FDM part to look uglier.

You do realize that FDM was never meant for prime time, right? It was meant to get a concept into the physical world the quickest whereas the injection molded part was made as the final step so by that very nature the FDM is just uglier because it was never meant to be pretty.

Frankly I have yet to see anything printed that looks good that was in its raw state. Now the largest layer height I would say is acceptable is .1mm and even that needs work so someone came up with an Acetone vapor bath to simulate the polished look of an injection molded part. They didn't come up with that had they thought FDM was just as pretty.

---

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

... it's not only you 'impressed by the possibilities and development potential'

I'm looking from a more 'proffessional' point of view - was developing and manufacturing parts on micron- to nanometer-level with equipment worth some hundreds of thousand Euros ...

It's not the quality, resolution or stability of the printed parts, what impresses me - it's more the ability of a 'normal' hobbyist to have an idea, read/learn into 'reprapping' and realise his idea into a real part ... and improve it on his own, if it's not sufficient!

Now combine this with improvements ... let the numbers of this 'hobyyists' rise to a critical level ... and this 'hobby' will turn in a serious base of 'individualized' industry - in contrary to the actual mass-markets, driven only by comercial interests ...

---

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

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

VDX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm looking from a more 'proffessional' point of
> view - was developing and manufacturing parts on
> micron- to nanometer-level with equipment worth
> some hundreds of thousand Euros ...
>
> It's not the quality, resolution or stability of
> the printed parts, what impresses me - it's more
> the ability of a 'normal' hobbyist to have an
> idea, read/learn into 'reprapping' and realise his
> idea into a real part ... and improve it on his
> own, if it's not sufficient!
>
> Now combine this with improvements ... let the
> numbers of this 'hobyyists' rise to a critical
> level ... and this 'hobby' will turn in a serious
> base of 'individualized' industry - in contrary to
> the actual mass-markets, driven only by comercial
> interests ...

BINGO! That is what still holds me but we do have to be honest with ourselves that most people don't, will not, or can't make a model to save their own life. These are the mass consumers I am talking about not we who do make models. We love the thought of what we have made being printed, upgraded, etc... This a RepRap is perfect for.

---

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

One of the perceived problems with FDM the visible layers is greatly over played.
It's easy to have the opinion if all you ever see are pictures of printed parts, often they are magnified, and often there are layer alignment issed which compound the issue.
At < 0.2mm layer heights models can look very good, not injection molded good, but more than passable for most people.

Does Joe Q Public want a full color 3D printer that prints large objects with production quality in a matter of seconds, sure but that doesn't make it any closer to realization.

In the 2000's I used various 3D printers from various vendors, and for the most part even the fused powder printers weren't producing prints any better than repraps do today, and at the time looking at a part funny would make it fall apart. They've certainly improved over the last decade and so have repraps.

Change isn't instantaneous, people are looking at other technologies, paste extruders, fused powder, stereo lithography etc etc etc.
But interms of easy to construct with readily available print materials, FDM is hard to beat today.

I'm personally interested in UV cured epoxies extruded/printed as I think it makes a lot of sense, it opens avenues for color, but it's never going to be really fast, fundamentally you have to cure the epoxy, the state change produces heat, that release limits the speed you can practically cure at.

I'm not really sure how any of this relates to the original topic, Makibox isn't selling anything revolutionary (outside of price), I think they will probably have mechanical issues at anything but very slow speeds, with skew introduced because they are driving one end of the carriages. Giving people a bad experience for $200 isn't going to make more people excited about 3D printing or drive change.

Yes, I agree Polygonhell and I have already ran into two people who said to hell with RepRaps and 3d printing. I was a tad shocked so I messaged them back and forth (they were a few weeks apart) and they said it was just too discombulated and disjointed with no homogeny. Basically they were thrown all over the place and had several issues and left in disgust.

So, with Makibox having issues and an extremely attractive price we may lose more than we get which is not good as those that leave will have a sour taste in their mouth about all of this and they will tell a lot of people who are just starting to look in on us.

btw, here where I live someone called in to a conservative talk show host to talk about these 3d printing people who have used RepRaps to print the lower part of an AR-15. I was shocked to here this mentioned and even more shocked when the talk show host (Phil Valentine) knew exactly about 3d printing. So, word is spreading.

---

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

Dark Alchemist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Frankly I have yet to see anything printed that
> looks good that was in its raw state.

Is that why you have 636 posts in 6 months, but still have not bothered to build a printer?

billyzelsnack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dark Alchemist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Frankly I have yet to see anything printed that
> > looks good that was in its raw state.
>
> Is that why you have 636 posts in 6 months, but
> still have not bothered to build a printer?

Ding. Game over, thanks for playing, DA.

Seriously, if you love the idea of using a laser for heating, and can get one for $40, go for it. If you build a better print head, publish it on RepRap or some other forum and open source it, or try to make a business selling it. I assure you (having worked with lasers) it won't be quite as easy as you make it sound. But it should be possible to do it, and it might be better than what we have. The optics will be difficult - precise lenses are expensive, and imprecise lenses won't give you sub millimeter focus. And the whole optical system has to either move with the print head, or adjust the focal point as the head moves. None of these problems are trivial, although some are solved.

It sounds like you should steer yourself towards one of the stereolithography systems. Working fluid is more expensive, but resolution is good out of the box. If you haven't already, check out [www.instructables.com]. Although the resolution of that system might not impress you either.

I'm not from Texas, but down there they have a saying, "Big hat, no cattle." Take some of your energy and passion and put it into construction.

Regards,
aeronaut

billyzelsnack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dark Alchemist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Frankly I have yet to see anything printed that
> > looks good that was in its raw state.
>
> Is that why you have 636 posts in 6 months, but
> still have not bothered to build a printer?

You mean with everything he says, he hasn't built/used even one!!??

Well I know whos opinion I'm ignoring from now on. ;-)

billyzelsnack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dark Alchemist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Frankly I have yet to see anything printed that
> > looks good that was in its raw state.
>
> Is that why you have 636 posts in 6 months, but
> still have not bothered to build a printer?
I have used one, a few times, at the local hackerspace and that, plus economics of being poor, means I do not have one.

Do I really want to spend 500 on building one, money I don't have, for something a tad inferior for the purposes I need it for or spend that money to upgrade my 4 year old computer system? Either one will take a year to two years for me to do and the computer system wins out. We will see if in two years any thing changes in the reprap world but if in 7 we are still running around basically doing the same we did with the Darwin I highly doubt.

Have a nice day and don't try and turn this into a class warfare situation.

---

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

aeronaut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> billyzelsnack Wrote:
...
> I'm not from Texas, but down there they have a
> saying, "Big hat, no cattle." Take some of your
> energy and passion and put it into construction.
>
> Regards,
> aeronaut
I will if the economics of the Obama era finally ends and people start to make money again.

Just because you have money to spend on stuff doesn't mean we all do and money should not be the deciding factor of who can contribute ideas and who can't.

No socieconomic or class warfare bull dung should be allowed but this is the attitude the "lower" class seems to get if they dare to rock the boat.

---

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

The Rep in RepRap is short for Replicatable. It will not be "rethunk". Those that wish a divergence from this goal are either a) lacking in the skills to achieve it thus think its impossible or b) afraid that it will cut into their profits.

Replicatability has been and will continue to be a priority for some of us, whether you like it or not. Take your closed source and your greed elsewhere.

coresnake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Rep in RepRap is short for Replicatable. It
> will not be "rethunk". Those that wish a
> divergence from this goal are either a) lacking in
> the skills to achieve it thus think its impossible
> or b) afraid that it will cut into their profits.
>
> Replicatability has been and will continue to be a
> priority for some of us, whether you like it or
> not. Take your closed source and your greed
> elsewhere.
Agreed, but we can't forget just how many are in this to make money if even enough to fund their 3d printing hobby.

Fact is I am starting to see some ugly people come out in defense of whatever and they, just like Obama (politics sorry but the best modern example I have), are now going to start using class warfare to bring subterfuge into the conversation. Oh, you don't have one? Well, why not? Too poor? Then eff off and allow us to continue to soil ourselves with 100-160 dollar printed parts and slam them up on Ebay. Poor people should never be allowed to think is the vibe I just got YET, in the same breathe, they will bring up 3rd world nations and communities. Effing hypocrits.

---

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

coresnake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Rep in RepRap is short for Replicatable.
> Replicatability has been and will continue to be a
> priority for some of us, whether you like it or
> not.

Also think on the reason for Replication. The idea is for decentralized production, at a low build material cost, so that many people can produce goods.

It moves the production capability away from 'economies of scale' and makes it feasible for a small production unit to be competitive by versatility with many larger production systems.

The replication factor is actually a side effect of the goal of decentralized production with the advantage of variety of production. If RepRap had to be built by a large production system, it would be following the problem it is trying to correct, the problem being the consolidated of production caused by the 'economies of scale' that leads to monopolies, and large material inequities, and out of balance systems of distribution and production in society.

It should be noted, that when production becomes higher then demand in society, Capitalism fails, and that cause attempts at solutions to the problem like WW2 occurring. Where when capitalism was failing, 80 percent of european production was destroyed by bombs so The New Deal, and USSR would not be able to compete with Capitalism by that new adding of 'demand' of rebuilding after a war. Other manufactured solutions to prop up capitalism, that requires scarcity,(production below demand) are no production sectors like finance and transportation, things like wall street expansion, and transportation(free trade), sectors that both do not add production, but find a way to 'make profit' from no production when production is over demand. Consumerism is also a side effect of trying to keep Capitalism going when production is over demand.

In a system where production is over demand, a correction like decentralizing production, does have a lesser 'production value per unit created' but that is not a problem at all, since production is over demand. So systems like the RepRap can move in without any downside of a slower production cycle, and an upside of putting production capabilities into the hands of many people.

The idea of self reproducing is more of a side effect of the bigger goal of breaking up consolidations with a product that overcomes economies of scale with its wide range of products it can produce. While also moving control of economies into a larger segment of the population by decentralizing control of production, and that is possible since production of many objects is above demand, and while production is above demand, increase or decrease in efficiency is not relevant.

It should be noted, raw material cost is relevant. Ideally, the 3d Printers should be able to use scrap plastic. Allowing for products bought at stores, packed in ABS containers, to then be used, and then the container be used in a 3d printer. In the show Back to the Future, the Flux Compacitor was pretty neat invention, but getting it to run on a variety of fuels was the real ground breaking step in making the product useful.

So replication is important, since it fits decentralized production goals, however it is not above the primary goal of decentralized production, so if centralized production was used to ship or create 3d printers, as long as they could also be created by that printer, and fueled outside of centralized control, that would be a jump start using the worker(capitalism) to create its replacement, something profit motive capitalism does often.

Note long patent enforcement is used to keep production centralized, patents are intended to give the inventor some pay for a product invented to get people to invest, not to keep a product under control of centralized production, hence both copyright and patent lengths should be shorter.

Bob Eastwood
Robert Eastwood

Note also that decentralized production has a smaller gene pool, why you see media and many small control groups become stale and self repetitive in style when they do not bring in outside ideas, and only allow for 'there own group' to have an idea. When you see that a TV doctor on news, is show made based on his book, you know the information pool of 'the groups' is a small gene pool, that does not have much influx of new ideas. They do try to solve the stale problem by stealing ideas then trying to move those ideas under centralized control, where they are said to be from a 'sanctioned' member of the group, so that happens often also. That is often called farming people, where only the pigs get the profit of most peoples ideas.(animal farm)

Anyways, back on topic

Self replication, and decentralized production, also uses advantages of cloud sourcing, with a very large pool of ideas to draw on, something economies of scale lack, as they have smaller gene pools then decentralized production. Although they try to make up for that by theft of ideas.

Note that to try to limit the potential of systems that are decentralized, systems of centralized 'economies of scale' will try to keep people from communicating with each other by information control, or attempts at isolation (internet censorship, or controls over what items can be seen) to try to keep 'centralized production' even if not as good an idea, as the control over production.

Also why many simple solutions to many problems were classified for years, not because they needed to be, but because they challenge some centralized control system, also why some want to control some things like information access on media, or Internet, to again limit the 'gene pool' by isolation of cloud sourced ideas, since that is the advantage of decentralized production.

The conceptual idea of the Rep Rap, is much more then self production, it is also decentralized production.

And this is a good 3d printer song.

And a good Cheer for both people, and the Machines that can replicate

I'll Melt With You - Modern English
[www.youtube.com]


Have you wondered why there are not more news stories on things like 3d printing? When they talk non stop about issues that are not about economic systems, and only effect a few families in the entire nation, they try to make small tragedies a national story, and ignore the bigger problems where economies and distribution systems effect everyone, and they avoid that conversation.

You bring up another point I haven't even touched upon yet and that is sustainability because all of these 'folks' love to talk about 3rd world nations and bringing repraps to them but they never mention what in the hell would they do with one after you bring it to them? The cost of the filament is no small potatoes and to a 3rd world village they would see the cost of the filament/materials or food for their family and they would choose food.

Yeah, I know it seems to be a liberal catch phrase lately and in vogue to 'worry about the 3rd world nations' but you must think beyond bringing them anything because this is not something poor people can use because of the cost of the filament. Now let the poor people use garbage, like Doc Brown did in Back to the Future in the future car for fuel, and we have something that really would change everything.

---

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

I agree about the use of scrap plastic as a raw material also being a large goal. However at present, the reality is that ABS is (comparatively) cheap, while the machines themselves are not. Self-replicatibility would fix that.Decentralized production is great, but not for machines which can build nothing more than simple toys. Replicatbility would allow progress in the design of the machine to quicken, as more and more people got their hands on the machines at a cheaper price.

This contradicts the greedy plans of some who merely wish to sell expensive parts, and build slightly modified Mendels with their name plastered on it, to boost their own ego and wallets. That my friend, is good old capitalism rearing its ugly head again.

coresnake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree about the use of scrap plastic as a raw
> material also being a large goal. However at
> present, the reality is that ABS is
> (comparatively) cheap, while the machines
> themselves are not. Self-replicatibility would fix
> that.Decentralized production is great, but not
> for machines which can build nothing more than
> simple toys. Replicatbility would allow progress
> in the design of the machine to quicken, as more
> and more people got their hands on the machines at
> a cheaper price.
>
> This contradicts the greedy plans of some who
> merely wish to sell expensive parts, and build
> slightly modified Mendels with their name
> plastered on it, to boost their own ego and
> wallets. That my friend, is good old capitalism
> rearing its ugly head again.
Agreed, and lets not fool ourselves RepRaps aren't affordable to a lot of first world citizens so forget about the third world and even if they had 10k given to them free and all the filament those machines needed for life for free what in the hell would a 3rd world country use it for? Be serious now and answer that question realistically.

The third world will not print bricabrac or whatnots they want stuff to help their life and I don't see it happening for decades minimum if ever.

---

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

OK, now I'm confused again by your rantings. No one mentioned anything about class warfare until you did.

"No socieconomic or class warfare bull dung should be allowed but this is the attitude the "lower" class seems to get if they dare to rock the boat."

Umm, what? My comment that you should build something had nothing to do with class or money, and everything to do with experience and useful knowledge. While ideas are free, coming here (or anywhere else) and posting stuff that you can't back up with some experience just wastes people's time.

I haven't built a 3D printer yet, or even worked with one, but I've been studying up on them for some time now. Further, I have a Ph.D. in physics, and have done years worth of work building experiments, machining parts, working with software and hardware (including building circuits using Arduinos); this experience gives me a lot of knowledge and information that is very pertinent to these discussions. I also have some very specific goals that I want to achieve with 3D printing, and I'm pursuing this hobby in a way to accomplish those goals. But I'm not dissing people who have done things I haven't done, or criticizing stuff I have no experience in.

I'm through with this line of discussion. It's not my job to teach you anything; and if it were, the salary would have to be a lot higher than what it costs to build a 3D printer. I wish you good luck in getting some free cash and eventually building the 3D printer of your dreams.

Regards,
aeronaut

I haven't built a 3D printer yet, or even worked with one - I haven't built one but I have worked with one in total about 12 hours.
but I've been studying up on them for some time now. - So have I
Further, I have a Ph.D. in physics - So?
and have done years worth of work building experiments, machining parts, working with software and hardware (including building circuits using Arduinos); this experience gives me a lot of knowledge and information that is very pertinent to these discussions. - Agreed to this second part
I also have some very specific goals that I want to achieve with 3D printing, and I'm pursuing this hobby in a way to accomplish those goals. - So, you agree it is just a hobby then?

I'm through with this line of discussion. - Good
It's not my job to teach you anything; - I never said it was but I do love your community spirit of what Open Source is all about.
and if it were, the salary would have to be a lot higher than what it costs to build a 3D printer. - Good ole capitalism at its greediest.

edit: I didn't know I needed a Doctoral degree to have ideas or to discuss the short comings of this 'hobby'.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2013 12:43AM by Dark Alchemist.

---

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

DA, 12 hours with your makerspace's machine does not experienced make you.
Build one/get one, actually tune the thing and learn every little in and out, use it to make some parts, and then share in the conversations about this "hobby machine's" "lack of quality"





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2013 01:33AM by xclusive585.

... this sort of disputes about pro's and con's of RepRap or the ideals, possibilities and potentials behind are as old as the community itself ... you can find a bunch of similar points of view and arguments here in the forum and even 'in the wild'

More interestingly is the position of Adrian (the inventor/initiator of the RepRap-idea) - he is really happy, if the RepRaps are modified to work with powders, fluids, lasers, milling heads or other usefull equipment, materials and methodes.

For him the idea behind 'viral spread of fabbers for home-manufacturing' is the most value point, not the type or (actual) limitations ... this would be handled on its own, when enough people with skills are involved ...

Who remembers the fab@home-printers, developed ad MIT, can see another interesting point:
- the f@h-printers were designed as nearly perfect systems, printing with paste-dispensers and a much higher count of possible materials (rigid, elastic, conducting, edible, ...)
- the first RepRaps were designed as simple base concept, targeted for own improvements and modifications in software and hardware.

I've then got in contact with both inventors and core groups - but only RepRap survived and is even more active, driven not by the core-team, but by newcomers and adopters, got involved and experienced with time.

Some serious people (Wall-street analysts, governmet advisors, intelligences, 'global playing' competitors, ...) are observing this development and the 'consensus' says, this will be the next technological/industrial revilution after the PC and WWW.

They compare the actual situation with the spread of PC's around 1980 - but the expected developing pace is estimated to 3 times faster than with PC's.

Now think about the development from first home-computers (Apple, Commodore, Atari ...) to actual PC's and software ... and then imagine a similar development rate for common RepRap's/3D-printers in 10 years

---

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

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

Thank you for the insightful and informative post Viktor.

xlcusive585: I see you didn't bother to touch upon my point of viability because when it is all said and done it WILL be a fad UNLESS we move away from filament. I say this knowing that most people don't even use printers like they did a decade ago (I read that stat last month). I still stand by my premise that filament printers (not RepRap but let me repeat that for the ones with a reading impairment not RepRap) are not of the future because there is too much inherently wrong with it. What this community should be doing, since so many people love to bring up 3rd world countries, is figuring out ways to make it viable for everyone outside of knick-knacks and bricabrac. Do the scrap and trash idea for printing materials instead of filament which takes a lot of resources to make (I can only estimate what the carbon foot print to make a roll must be like) BUT you can't make money with scrap and trash. Yes, the above poster was spot on about the money part because I see that too much. From people over valuing their worth to the world to people charging 140+ dollars to make a few items off of their printer.

So, here is something you need to digest and that is I asked, on irc, why people are charging so much for the plastic pieces? I was told because they have to make them a few times as some pieces will have flaws in them. BOOOOOOM headshot because if a 3d filament printer is messing up, so they said in irc, to print a simple item like some Mendel I2 plastic parts then how can ANY of you say this is yet ready for a mass consumer market? Not having a printer or having one is immaterial to this discussion at hand because the ones who have way more knowledge of RepRaps than I do admit it has a lot of flaws. Flaws in a consumer market is not something to be tolerated but right now it is in the hobbyist market so it seems to be more acceptable. Are people working on this issue? Sure, but we have things like Makibot ripping off the OS (sorry I consider it stealing ip if you grab an idea and make money with it you might not) to sell a 200 dollar printer and every last one of you know, at least deep down, that it will be a POS. Do we really want a POS out there to ruin the perception of this? NO, absolutely not.

So, not having a printer allows me to have something that apparently you lack xclusive585 (btw, that was not a put down at all) and that is a clean perspective like someone looking in instead of someone so caught up in their own machines, and movement, that they have become slightly blinded. What you need are more people with a clean perspective that haven't been tainted with owning a machine yet so they can give you unbiased opinions.

Basically I am saying to step back and realize you have lost your objectivity because when people come out to attack me it shows they are NOT as secure in their beliefs as they wish to be (sort of like Christians do if you question the bible (I will leave that statement where it is so we don't start down that road)).

I will own one but it will take time and when I do you can bet my perspective will change but my knowledge of what a filament printer is and what it will become AND its worldly usefulness will not change...it is a toy and will always be one because it uses a filament [edit] of plastic.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2013 09:02AM by Dark Alchemist.

---

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

vdx: I agree but only that the premise of 3d printers is where this is headed not filament printers.

Nice to see Dr. Bowyer stands by the replication part as I belive we should not budge from that objective else you cease to be a reprap. Nice to know he doesn't care about the mechanism to achieve that goal as well so we can move away from the stupid filament we are using now but I still don't understand why we are stuck using it.

---

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

... printing with filament isn't that stupid ... it's only not mature enough to create 'perfect' surfaces

Going from 3mm to 1.75mm showed some promise ... essentially lesser needed pressure, so simpler/smaller motors ...

Reducing the nozzle diameter and layer heights showed better surface and detail qualities ... but rised the printing time drastically too ...

---

I'm thinking some time now about a radical change of 'filament-printing' - use even thinner plastic wire (e.g. fishing line with 0.05mm diameter) and melt/fuse it direct to the surface by pushing it in the hot spot of a laser ... read here some talk about this (in the 'Discussion'-tab): [reprap.org]

I've made this sort of 'wire-fusing' some years ago with 30 microns thick glass- and 10 microns thick platinum-wires for special designed microsensors - the complex part here is the feeding mechanismus to synchronize the 'wire-pushing' with the moving speed of the head ...

---

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

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

VDX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ... printing with filament isn't that stupid ...
> it's only not mature enough to create 'perfect'
> surfaces
>
> Going from 3mm to 1.75mm showed some promise ...
> essentially lesser needed pressure, so
> simpler/smaller motors ...
>
> Reducing the nozzle diameter and layer heights
> showed better surface and detail qualities ... but
> rised the printing time drastically too ...
>
> ---
>
> I'm thinking some time now about a radical change
> of 'filament-printing' - use even thinner plastic
> wire (e.g. fishing line with 0.05mm diameter) and
> melt/fuse it direct to the surface by pushing it
> in the hot spot of a laser ... read here some talk
> about this (in the 'Discussion'-tab):
> [reprap.org]
>
> I've made this sort of 'wire-fusing' some years
> ago with 30 microns thick glass- and 10 microns
> thick platinum-wires for special designed
> microsensors - the complex part here is the
> feeding mechanismus to synchronize the
> 'wire-pushing' with the moving speed of the head
> ...

I read a thread, from 2008, talking about lasers and you were talking about that I do believe.

True about the maturity level for filament but see I don't think we will ever get filament to be smooth, clean, and print fast. We need all three of those but, I must keep bringing this up, that plastic filament has no real uses in an African village either.

I loved the idea of really tiny stands being used to print with because a 1 watt laser (those are $9.99 on ebay most of the time) could easily melt that fine of a filament AND the printing would be so damn fine it would achieve the look, and feel part adequately but can we ever print fast and still achieve the other other two requirements using a plastic filament?

---

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

... fishing line is thin, clear, and worldwide available for cheap

And on the hobby-/DIY-scale printing time isn't a big issue ... and with improvement over time this would be handled too ...

---

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

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