Hi guys, I have currently one Reprap Air 2 XL in my home.



Since not so many of you have an Air, I am thinking of maybe building a Prusa i3.
Or a Mendelmax 1.5

My Air is giving me some mechanical trouble and I would like to build a 2nd machine that has a bigger amount of users, and therefor a bigger amount of improvements.

I feel drawn towards a Mendelmax 1.5 because of the extrusions and it just seems so damn sturdy, but the Prusa i3 on the other hand really tickles my minimalist mind.

Now, what I am thinking of is, should I wait for the Mendelmax 2.0 to become open-source or will that take a year?
My needs are mostly that I want more stability than the Air 2 but around an equal build area. My Air 2 now has a build area of 190x190x130.

- Marinus

have you look at mendel90? i think it hast a lot of improvements from the start and the user base is growing

Hi Gerard, nice mention, I will check it out!

I really don't want to lose build space, so I hope it's the same or bigger




Gerard Choinka Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> have you look at mendel90? i think it hast a lot
> of improvements from the start and the user base
> is growing

Mendel90 is a great choice, so is Prusa i3. Both their build envelopes are similar to what you have now.

Aluminum extrusion based machines are nice in that they're more flexible in their assembly - you can potentially re-use the structural members in other machines/projects. But they are not as rigid.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

We have built around 12 or 13 MDF Mendel90s in college and supervised two build processes of Nophead's Dibond Mendel90 kit. Both versions went without problems. They are just friggin' rock solid.
While the MDF builds had a working envelope of 190x190x130, just like your Prusa Air, Nophead's version is a full 200x200x200 if I remember correctly.

My only concern with the Mendel90 is that it is quite large compared to its build volume (like 8 times the working volume). This is also true for a lot of other RepRaps, though, but the Prusa i3 is flat-packable, so if you plan to move it often using public transport or a bike, this might be a better choice (speaking from experience, carrying my cyberpunk styled monster of a printer in the subway sure did attract a lot of attention in addition to wearing out my arms).

Aha, I have been checking the Mendel90, but have to admit that the footprint of the machine would be too much for it to fit anywhere in my living space.

I am still leaning towards the i3 or the Mendelmax. With the Mendelmax still being the more elegant solution for me.

While still improving my Air 2, it's maybe a good idea to wait till the Mendelmax 2.0 becomes alpha and the plans become freely available?

The Mendel90 should be smaller than your Air. It certainly fits in a smaller box than Mendel or Prusa 2.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

The overall volume might be reduced even further by using a direct drive 1.75mm extruder on a smaller carriage. Some tweaks here and there can make the footprint during storage smaller (but volume during a print remains about the same).

What you gain with mass is stability, though.

I would prefer an already well documented and popular printer over a model that is not fully released yet, to be honest.

Okay, well, I see good things about the Mendelmax, and leaning more and more towards the Mendelmax 1.5 now.

I have checked out what I need to order, I am planning to build one with a Bowden extruder, it looks damn nice and I like the low-weight on the X-carriage this way.

The total frame price for me would be around 93 euros without additional nuts and bolts and I would still need to create the printed parts.
Furthermore I should get me a new set of stepper motors.

Everything else I have here. Tomorrow I receive my Ultrakit from Fabster3D, the chinese vendor that sells the G3D kit, with a Budaschnozzle, etc Ramps, everything. So all I need after that is a set of 5 stepper motors and I'm set to just build me a MendelMax.

And which printer of the two I like the most, I will keep, the other I will sell.
Thanks for your replies so far.

Does any of you own a Mendelmax 1.5?




uGen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The overall volume might be reduced even further
> by using a direct drive 1.75mm extruder on a
> smaller carriage. Some tweaks here and there can
> make the footprint during storage smaller (but
> volume during a print remains about the same).
>
> What you gain with mass is stability, though.
>
> I would prefer an already well documented and
> popular printer over a model that is not fully
> released yet, to be honest.

Why not bit the bullet and build a klossl or berrybot?

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

I can't find anything on the klossl What kind of machine is it? Are you pulling my leg here?

Would like to make the berrybot, ofcourse, but with my study, I can't spend too much time in the metal workshop...

I bet he is talking about Kossel.

Sorry - I totally mis-spelled that!

if you're interested in a delta bot there is a very active google group you should check out.

[groups.google.com]

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2013 09:10AM by akhlut.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

Okay, I have started to design my own printer.

I also like the Delta, so I might try out to build a Rostock. But before that I will create my own Air 2 XL interpretation.

The keyword is: Triangles.

If you like triangles than maybe you'd like a Prism.
[forums.reprap.org]

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

Nice one, I would say it is related to the MendelMax somewhere

My idea for now is to create a printed in MDF, that can be created on a CNC milling machine and uses 9mm MDF wood, or some kind of multiplex birch.

To be honest I really don't like to work with acrylate and wood has something nice with it's colors. I am going to try and avoid lasercut parts, we have a lasercutter at our academy, but I first want to try and use the CNC mill to see if that old machine still has something in it's gut. When I'm done with the frame design, I can easily create large batches of the frame because the CNC mill at my school is much faster than the laser cutter. This way I can create some frames that I can send to other people just for the material cost of it, and have them work with me on the design. This will be the first time to develop such a thing.

Today I have set the first step in enhancing the function of the X-endstop, and I must say I'm pretty satisfied with the result. One less cable hanging around in my view on the machine.

Which machine I will use to create the printer also depends on if the CNC mill can actually drill 3mm holes. If it can't, then I'd have to use the lasercutter, or try and have the CNC mill 'mark' the spots for me so I can later manually drill those holes out.

I have made some sketches on the design already, I have dropped the idea of triangles for now and am going for a semi-open box design, where the box will be fixed on three sides with panels and have one open side for the entire machine to be reachable. It will be a big beast, and probably very heavy, but I will try to make it portable (so I probably have to choose for multiplex birch anyway.. or poplar, but I'm not sure if thats good for a machine that works with heat considering the wood might 'work' as in 'bend').

This semi-open box design gives good access into the belly of the beast but also becomes a semi-heated box design, with a front door that you can close. The door runs from edge to edge, so there is no 'window' idea. I have always hated the window design in lasercutters and machines alike. I want the space to be accessible in the full height and width.

Am also learning to at least modify OpenSCAD files for now, I have created my own smart extruder by changing one from Thingiverse and it can be used without a problem with the Budaschnozzle, works flawlessly!

Now that I have been digging more into cable management, I think building my own machine will be at least a personal success.

Eventually, when the frame is done, I also have to devise a way of printing all the other connecting parts with my 3D printer. After all, the whole concept at reprap is that you use part sourced material and part printed parts, so using a CNC mill to create the frame is already cheating in a way

Will keep you posted!
- Marinus



akhlut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you like triangles than maybe you'd like a
> Prism.
> [forums.reprap.org]

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2013 06:55PM by Ohmarinus.

Sounds like you are doing about the same as I am planning to do, even down to a semi-open box design.
The Mendel design, although venerable and practical, does have its drawbacks in portability and heat insulation.
I am considering to use pre-drilled aluminium profiles as a frame, though and add panels for insulation according to the situation. That way, you can have a closed, heat insulating box without compromising the accessibility of the parts compared to designs where the panels are integral to the frame with a little bit of added weight.

Definitely have a look at Mauk's Cartesio if you haven't already for a nice way of moving the X axis with a static motor without the problems of a H-Bot / Core-XY-setup. Gonna copy this in my build...

Also, I don't see why a CNC machine should not be able to drill 3mm holes. Sure, they won't be perfectly round, but you won't notice the polygons more than in a 3d print anyway.

Birch is definitely much sturdier (and more expensive) than poplar. I have built a heat insulating chamber out of poplar because it was cheap and because the chamber did not need to be strong, but you can easily damage the surface with your fingernails and all in all, even 10mm poplar is quite wobbly. Another interesting material I am considering is what some know as Garolite or Tufnol: fabric laminate. But I don't know if this is really suitable yet since I didn't run any tests with it.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2013 07:53PM by uGen.

This night I dreamt of an interesting concept...

I dreamt that I had designed a casting mold to 'pour' a 3D-printer in concrete... Maybe I should try that