What's your minimum build volume?

Just wanted to get a few opinions. I'm designing a printer that I'll be releasing at some point, and I wanted some opinions on what a minimum build volume would be.

I know most people would jump and say a ~200 mm cube, but when was the last time you used all of that build area? Most of the stuff I've printed would fit in a ~100 mm cube, and usually the z height goes mostly unused.

The size is going to have little to no impact on the cost of the printer, if people have reservations about that.

10 mm x 10 mm x 7mm

I think rectangular beds have some promise. I'd consider something like 200x100 more useful than 150x150. 100^3 is okay but 150^3 is probably a more realistic minimum since you lose a bit of space for the skirt and such.

Most of my prints are less than 80mm high.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/2017 02:44PM by 691175002.

40micron round...



Its a silly question, as it depends on your application, what your trying to print.

Image from [www.3ders.org] if your interested

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/2017 10:34PM by Dust.

I started out wanting a precise 100x100 machine as minimal end output, but when its so easy to 200x200x100 you might as well go a little higher & longer if possible, though having a tiny cute printer is still a fun problem, and can lead to interesting detours.

I don't really have a minimum but....200x200 is probably the most inexpensive way to go as it has the most bed options for the lowest price. Any other bed size is non-standard. There will be a few options for different sizes but a ton of options for 200x200.

Quote
Dust
40micron round...

Its a silly question, as it depends on your application, what your trying to print.

Image from [www.3ders.org] if your interested

I'm talking hobbyists, there is variation in peoples needs, but there is also common ground, hence why certain sizes have become super common. Clearly ~200mm cube is common, because it's a good size for the markey. But how many people have even come close to using that on a print (other than some random vase they threw away almost immediately)? I know I haven't. I've pushed X and Y close to 200, but Z hardly goes above 50 or 100 mm.

Thanks a lot for the replies from the rest of you.

For anyone interested, I'm doing a revision of the GUS Simpson to improve accuracy, usability etc. It's got an a-typical build space so I was wondering how large I should make the build space in order to fit most people's needs. Because all of GUS Simpson's joints are rotational, choosing a build volume given your hardware is somewhat arbitrary, you can make the arms whatever length you'd like and still use the same bearings, within reason. With linear guides, the length of the guide decides your build space, and your budget/availability decides the length of the guide.

I found 200x200mm too small on a number of occasions, usually when I wanted to print something log and thin. So my second printer has a 300mm diameter build area, which I have found adequate. 300x200 would also be good. As to height, I have 400mm available but 150mm would be enough for me.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/02/2017 11:34AM by dc42.

---

Large delta printer [miscsolutions.wordpress.com], E3D tool changer, Robotdigg SCARA printer, Crane Quad and Ormerod

Disclosure: I design Duet electronics and work on RepRapFirmware, [duet3d.com].

Fair point, Most of my prints are significantly longer in either the x or y axis, rather than being square, I suppose the simpson geometry lends itself to this as you have your incircle of the triangle as a sort of standard shape, then the three peaks each give you a little more room in that direction.

Currently the bed is the same size as the standard Simpson, ithas a diameter of 250 for the triangle, the biggest circle you can fit on the bed is just over 210 mm diameter (fits a 200 by 150 cylinder according to nicholas seward), but the longest item you can print is 250 mm, though you lose z height towards either end. Does this sound big enough to most people? I believe the maximum build height should be around 215 at the very peak, minus whatever your hot end takes up. The build volume is roughly a triangular base pyramid, in reality you have a bit more to work with.

I built my JunkStrap for 300x300x300, but so far i didnt need to print bigger then 180
You can also use tricks like placing long thin stuff on a diagonal to gain a little length.
I'm also a fan of small build volumes and spliting large prints into smaller parts. Its usefull because instead of failing a 1000*1000*1000mm print , you only fail a section, it also saves money on heated beds

There was a company who did a survey on this (I want to say PrintrBot?) and they found that the average needed build area is 150mm^3. This makes sense to me, I often only print small items. When I need the extra space though which happens more and more often these days, my 215mm^2 build plate simply isn't enough... I recently needed more height then 220mm on my Z axis as well.

The problem is though, build space is one of the first specs users look at to compare printers. Try telling them 150mm^3 is adequate when the competition regularly boasts 200mm^3 or bigger build areas for very low prices. Creality CR10 is one that comes to mind (not that I would buy this hunk of junk...).

It's also relative to what you use it for. If you print junk off thingiverse, small is usually adequate. Useful household items tend to need bigger space. For example, a printed shelf bracket would benefit from being printed in a single piece as big as possible... a 150mm deep shelf is not very useful, but at 200+mm it starts to hold everyday items quite well.