|
Folks at MIT have printed a working, nearly perfect flute: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/01/print-your-own-flute.html (with video)
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 03:25 |
|
|
Videodrome posted:My order was on "processing - waiting to be packed" for 2 weeks. Last week it changed to "in production", whatever that means. Originally ordered on Jan. 4.  Mister Sinewave posted:I have a MakerBot (cupcake model, no heated build platform) and had I known then what I know now, I would have purchased an UP! instead. The UP! is more suited for "just print it" but the MakerBot's more suited to modding and endless tinkering and such. I am far more interested in the printing and end products than the rest of the process itself, so the mod-ability of the MakerBot's more of a hindrance than anything for me. Also, Skeinforge should be the new poster child for bad open source GUIs. Cuddlebottom fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Jan 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 17:50
|
|
|
I did look forward to (and generally enjoyed) the building of the MakerBot, just for the record. It's the endless tweaking/babysitting that always seems to get in the way of the actual printing I want to do that bugs me. I'm OK with tweaking and setting and calibrating, but when it feels like I get through it once only to just have to do it all over again the next time around... 
The Eyes Have It fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Jan 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 18:07
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:I did look forward to (and enjoyed) the building of the MakerBot, just for the record. It's the endless tweaking/babysitting that always seems to get in the way of any actual printing that bugs me. Mister Sinewave posted:I'm OK with tweaking and setting and calibrating, but when it feels like I get through it once only to just have to do it all over again the next time around... Cuddlebottom fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Jan 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 18:13
|
|
|
I've only ever had one serious bug, as in something that ruined a print. My unit happily printed my model, got to the end, then suddenly executed some kind of inexplicable return-to-zero sort of move, plowing the head through the top of the model as I watched.  The rest of bugs are more "glitches" and the associated maintenance work. Some are just part of the territory, like babysitting the print to make sure that the filament feeds properly. Others are no less understandable, but they compound the whole process. For example, the extruder head (V4) does not feed properly on the next print unless the filament is backed out at the end of each print. It's recommended in the documentation that you back out the filament between prints. Otherwise, I think that when it sits heated up and "idle" the filament heats up enough that the extruder motor's teeth can't grip the slightly softened ABS well when you go to print again, and it strips the filament instead of gripping it. I've tried a few ways to shortcut it, but the best option to avoid problems is really just to back it out, then re-feed when you're ready for the next print. The latest extruder (V5) might be better. Backing out the filament, then re-feeding it and doing a test extrusion between prints (with all the associated open control panel, manual setting of head temperature, wait for warm-up, manual setting of extruder motor to feed, watch for a good extrusion, then stop and clean off the head, then manually zero the Z stage) is really very tiresome. This is all compounded when you're doing an iterative process. Like, print your object, see after a couple minutes that no, that's not going well and I need to change something, abort the print, and do all that junk in between. (Maybe you're fiddling with a print design, maybe you're calibrating skeinforge settings.) So, while I've had only one seriously print-busting bug, the little glitches and their workarounds/overall maintenance and babysitting really gets very tiresome. I'd like a heated build platform (which will need a relay board too) and a V5 print head but I wonder if I will bother. I'm looking at spending another 250$ to do that, on a 1000$ machine I already had to buy replacement parts on because my original extruder's bottom half blew. With the low amount of printing I've managed to do I feel like I have to draw the line somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 18:52
|
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:This is all compounded when you're doing an iterative process. Like, print your object, see after a couple minutes that no, that's not going well and I need to change something, abort the print, and do all that junk in between. (Maybe you're fiddling with a print design, maybe you're calibrating skeinforge settings.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:29
|
|
|
So far the Mk5 seems to be working well for me. I never used the Mk4, so I can;t provide a comparison, but as long as all the other stuff is working, it feeds beautifully. So far my problems have been more electrical. First, some of the outputs on my extreuder controller stopped working(0 volts). Then, when I rearanged the wiring, and was getting the juice to the extruder motor, it still wouldn't work until I set up a relay system between it and the controller. Then i had some crazy short going on with the thermistor, so the temp always read 255 degrees, and wouldn't heat. So, that's just some of the excitement potentially waiting for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2011 00:28
|
|
|
The Adama posted:So, that's just some of the excitement potentially waiting for you.
Cuddlebottom fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Feb 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2011 17:10
|
|
|
The Adama posted:Then i had some crazy short going on with the thermistor, so the temp always read 255 degrees, and wouldn't heat. So, that's just some of the excitement potentially waiting for you. Quick, possibly obsolete tip: when I built my print head the pictures showed soldering the wires to the thermistor then wrapping it up well in kapton tape around the brass tube, etc etc. The picture at the time showed the junction between the thermistor leads and the thermistor wires pretty close to the brass tube/head, and they wound up under the outer insulator ribbon. Well the print head/nozzle itself gets to over 200C, which is PLENTY enough to melt solder.  When I disassembled my print head to rebuild it after it had an unrelated failure, inside all the tape was just blobs of solder that melted and went wherever. I realized that any soldered connections would just melt if they were too close to the print head. If your thermistor's leads were soldered up and not wrapped separately, and the junctions were close enough to the print nozzle to get to even ~120C-130C then your thermister will likely short due to a blob of melted solder bridging the connections.  
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2011 18:44
|
|
|
nolen posted:Thanks for the reply! I just saw that there is a CNC mill thread going through DIY and repeated my question in there to get any other insight. I didn't see a reply to this. I do have your answer. Fabric, on an industrial scale, is cut by water jet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
Guess what UPS just delivered!  
Videodrome fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Feb 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2011 23:59
|
|
|
Videodrome posted:Guess what UPS just delivered! Nice, will you do photos of the build as you progress?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 03:09
|
|
|
Videodrome posted:Guess what UPS just delivered!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
techknight posted:Nice, will you do photos of the build as you progress? I got about 1/3 built on Sunday, but I wasn't really consistent in taking photos. If you want REALLY detailed photos of the whole build, check out the assembly instructions wiki: http://wiki.makerbot.com/thingomatic-doc:thingomatic-assembly-instructions Here is what I have so far: Automated Build Platform conveyor belt motor  Heated build platform  Rollers for the ABP  X-stage carriage  Completed ABP  Y-stage parts  ABP (X-stage) mounted on Y-stage carriage  Z-stage carriage  Extruder frame  To anyone who has built the Automated Build Platform before: How tight is the conveyor belt supposed to be? Mine seems really tight and I'm afraid it might over-stress the little motor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2011 18:05
|
|
|
Videodrome posted:If you want REALLY detailed photos of the whole build, check out the assembly instructions wiki: http://wiki.makerbot.com/thingomatic-doc:thingomatic-assembly-instructions I know how to build one I just wanted to see yours.  Videodrome posted:To anyone who has built the Automated Build Platform before: How tight is the conveyor belt supposed to be? Mine seems really tight and I'm afraid it might over-stress the little motor. Pretty tight. If there's any give you get lopsided prints and the belt won't heat evenly, either. It's kind of a pain to fix later so mine is running beltless right now, haha.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 01:57
|
|
|
techknight posted:I know how to build one I just wanted to see yours. They released the MK6 today: it's (unsurprisingly) a stepper motor upgrade, with some extra parts so you can set it up for 1.75mm filament instead of 3mm. It looks like you'd have to disassemble the entire extruder to swap filament widths, though. I also can't tell if they actually trademarked "StepStruder" or are being sarcastic. I might get the chance to chat with someone at a large CAD company about DIYers with personal 3D printers. I was planning on talking about what exists for CAD software (Blender, Sketchup, OpenSCAD), a little about the open source community, popular machines (Mendel, Makerbot, UP!, etc) and some of the more interesting prints I've seen. Anything else I should talk about?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
Cuddlebottom posted:I also can't tell if they actually trademarked "StepStruder" or are being sarcastic. Well, they haven't registered it with the USPTO, so they're being sarcastic. So what does the stepper motor and 1.75mm filament actually mean? Better resolution, I assume? I'm not too impressed by MakerBot's marketing - the cheapest kit now available costs double what's listed in the op (although I understand that what somewhat discounted to clear out old stock), and I've not seen any description of the differences that are particularly meaningful to someone who's not already familiar with this stuff. It seems like they're only interested in selling upgrades to existing users.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
Zhentar posted:So what does the stepper motor and 1.75mm filament actually mean? Better resolution, I assume? I'm not too impressed by MakerBot's marketing - the cheapest kit now available costs double what's listed in the op (although I understand that what somewhat discounted to clear out old stock), and I've not seen any description of the differences that are particularly meaningful to someone who's not already familiar with this stuff. It seems like they're only interested in selling upgrades to existing users. Oops, I didn't even notice that they'd stopped selling the basic Cupcake CNC kit.. I'll update the OP later today with that and some more stuff. For the filament and motor change, they posted this on the MakerBot blog: quote:The MakerBot Stepstruder™ MK6 is the latest and greatest in MakerBot extrusion technology. With it, you get a lot more control over your plastic extrusion because instead of using a DC motor that just goes on and off, the MakerBot Stepstruder™ MK6 has a high torque stepper motor that allows you to control the rotation. This stepper motor has 200 steps per rotation and you’ll be driving it using the MakerBot Generation 4 Stepper Driver v3.3 (included in both the upgrade and complete Kits) to get a 1600 step per revolution. That means that you can control the extruder motor and when it goes one step it turns .225 of a degree. And this important bit for Thing-o-Matic purchasers: quote:We ran out of MK5 motors two weeks ago and have had Thing-O-Matics on hold as we have been getting parts in for this kit. Orders have been stacking up and so Thing-O-Matics that have been ordered, but not shipped yet will get this upgrade for free as a thank you for their patience As for differences between the original MakerBot Cupcake CNC and the Thing-o-Matic, it's a few things. The ToM is/has: Hidden electronics so there aren't cables everywhere The Cupcake has all of the eletronics mounted on the side, with lots of cables sticking out everywhere. Comes with a better-quality plastruder The MK4 plastruder that comes with the Cupcake is less reliable in terms of long prints and overall maintenance. The acrylic idler wheel in the MK4 is a pain to adjust and avoid breaking. Automated build platform out of the box The Cupcake has an acrylic build platform that is more susceptible to prints that curl up at the edges and prints that come unstuck from the platform during build. Also being automated, you can queue multiple objects at once and not have to do anything. More reliable Z-axis movement The Z-rods on the Cupcake can cause binding at greater heights and also are not as accurate as the system used in the ToM. I hope that doesn't make the Cupcake sound like a piece of poo poo, but even I've upgraded mine with an aftermarket nozzle and an automated build platform.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
I have a couple dumb questions. What software is required to transform CAD into a 'print-path' ? How is this software set up with regards the printer - resolution, decoding which axis is which etc? Could I build my own printer from scratch & use the software on it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2011 23:38
|
|
|
I finished my Thing-O-Matic today and have run my first successful print. I need to tweek my z-axis max height but other than that everything is running smoothly. Pics incoming.Cakefool posted:I have a couple dumb questions. What software is required to transform CAD into a 'print-path' ? How is this software set up with regards the printer - resolution, decoding which axis is which etc? Could I build my own printer from scratch & use the software on it? I think I know what you are asking, but if not please ignore me. By "CAD" you mean a model created in a 3D modeling program. Most of these programs (AutoCAD, 3DS Max, Blender, etc.) have the option to save models in the .STL file format. .STL files are originally for stereolithography, which is a higher end 3D printing technology. I'm guessing by "print-path" you mean the actual motor control script for a print job? If so, the MakerBot (and the RepRap too, I think) use an open source set of perl scripts called Skeinforge to "slice" a .STL object into individual layers and figure out the best series of movements for creating each layer. The output of Skeinforge is a text file saved as a .GCODE file. This file is a series of commands for all of the mechanics of the printer. Move X-Axis -20mm, raise temperature to 220 degrees C, spin extruder motor, etc. I assume that most of us are using a front-end for Skeinforge called ReplicatorG. http://replicat.org/ ReplicatorG gives you a GUI for the basic Skeinforce scripts. It also handles the interface between your PC and the 3D printer. The latest relese of ReplicatorG has built-in settings for most MakerBot and RepRap models. If you are looking at designing your own printer and want to look at the PC side software, this is where to start. Also, remember that the PC does not directly control the mechanics on the printer. The GCODE that your PC sends to the printer is parsed by the Arduino MEGA microcontroller, which is actually the brains of the printer. The Arduino is what follows the "script" of the GCODE and commands the mechanics to do what they need to do. Videodrome fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Feb 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 00:11
|
|
|
Pictures! Extruder with motor  Casing assembly  X and Y mounted  Wiring the heating elements to the extruder nozzle  Finished extruder  First Print!  (Yes, I forgot to take pictures of fighting with the wiring) Also, here is what I am printing right now:  edit: the Automated Build Platform is hilarious the way is spits out your prints onto the floor. Videodrome fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Feb 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 00:54
|
|
|
Cuddlebottom posted:I might get the chance to chat with someone at a large CAD company about DIYers with personal 3D printers. I was planning on talking about what exists for CAD software (Blender, Sketchup, OpenSCAD), a little about the open source community, popular machines (Mendel, Makerbot, UP!, etc) and some of the more interesting prints I've seen. Anything else I should talk about? Copyright issues might be an interesting topic. For example, I'm currently trying to convert World of Warcraft character models into usable STL files specifically so I can print out 3D figurines for friends. Once painted it will be essentially the same thing these guys charge $130 dollars for: http://www.figureprints.com/
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 01:06
|
|
|
Videodrome posted:Copyright issues might be an interesting topic. For example, I'm currently trying to convert World of Warcraft character models into usable STL files specifically so I can print out 3D figurines for friends. Once painted it will be essentially the same thing these guys charge $130 dollars for: http://www.figureprints.com/ There's been a lot of talk about that recently. There was some question about a 3D-printed Settlers of Catan set. That article has links to the original and some other musings on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
Videodrome posted:Copyright issues might be an interesting topic. For example, I'm currently trying to convert World of Warcraft character models into usable STL files specifically so I can print out 3D figurines for friends. Once painted it will be essentially the same thing these guys charge $130 dollars for: http://www.figureprints.com/ As a side note, if you came up with a method to capture models that didn't require tons and tons of post-processing, you should share. That would be awesome.Any comments or complaints on CAD software I could bring up? I'm curious what other people who have been into this longer think, especially since I haven't gotten to actually print any homemade models yet. I'd like to address a little bit of what is actually needed by hobbyists doing this at home (with a printer or Shapeways). I was planning on emphasizing the need for real parametric editing, but without the crazy simulation and enterprise tools in, say, a $5000 copy of Autodesk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
I'm mickey-mouse level on the 3D modeling end. I installed Sketchup and couldn't figure out how people were printing from it. (Turns out there's an add-on to export .STL files from Sketchup.) For anyone just casually following along, only .STL files can be processed by the printer software. So I model what I need in Sketchup, export to .STL, then import the STL with the makerbot software to print. I spent a little time trying to learn to use Blender for "real" 3D modeling but shortly after I regained my sanity I just stuck to Sketchup. Honestly Sketchup does all I need so that's where I went and stayed. I have no particular interest in 3D modeling outside of what I need to make the printer work (and all the things I design are geometrically simple. Sometimes complex, but still geometrically primitive.) The only thing I used Blender for after that was to load up the exported .STL file to make sure it looked sane, sometimes the .STL exported exported some  poo poo for some reason and I preferred to know BEFORE I tried to print it. The newer versions of ReplicatorG have a visualizer built in so that's nice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 05:29
|
|
|
Personally I really like wings3d for 3d printing, since it ensures that the models are manifold.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 10:30
|
|
|
Videodrome, thanks, that was exactly what I was asking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2011 13:36
|
|
|
Well, poo poo. It finally happened:quote:For better or worse, we’ve hit a milestone in the history of digital fabrication. We’ve just received our first DMCA takedown notice for a copyrighted object. Due to the DMCA we are required to respond to takedown notices in a timely manner or risk losing protection under the “Safe Harbor” provision. Since we’d like to continue to be a place where people can openly share their designs with the world, we have complied. And not over a LEGO minifig or a Catan board, it's about a Penrose triangle: http://blog.thingiverse.com/2011/02/18/copyright-and-intellectual-property-policy/
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2011 21:58
|
|
|
techknight posted:Well, poo poo. It finally happened: How the hell can you copyright that unless you are Roger Penrose or Oscar Reutersvärd? Even if you are them, that's like copyrighting a cube or something. ABSURD!
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 00:20
|
|
|
Twerpling posted:How the hell can you copyright that unless you are Roger Penrose or Oscar Reutersvärd? Even if you are them, that's like copyrighting a cube or something. ABSURD! Yup, it's crazy.. However, since Thingiverse wants DMCA safe harbour protection, they have to comply with takedown notices as part of the process. Hopefully a counter-notice will be filed where appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2011 01:01
|
|
|
techknight posted:Yup, it's crazy.. However, since Thingiverse wants DMCA safe harbour protection, they have to comply with takedown notices as part of the process. Hopefully a counter-notice will be filed where appropriate. Also, thanks for the comments about CAD software. I've never heard of Wings3D before. I'm hoping to convince this guy that DIY printing is an interesting group to look into - or at least to open up cheap, non-pro licenses to people who aren't students. I just hope my printer gets here soon enough to show off some models so I don't sound like a crazy futurist. I'm excited to see what the first CAD equivalent of iMovie or MS Word looks like in 5 years. Sketchup is good, but not that good yet. Edit: Aaand there's my shipping notice. Awesome. If anyone else is ordering one, that puts their lead time at a little over 4 weeks, including the MK6. Cuddlebottom fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
Cuddlebottom posted:Apparently it's back up: http://www.boingboing.net/2011/02/21/3d-printings-first-c.html Summary for the lazy: it's back up because the guy dropped the issue. He likely had a legitimate copyright claim; while he cannot lay claim to the concept of the Penrose Triangle, he did create a 3D representation of it, and that work is copyrightable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
Still interested in build photos? I'll try and get some shots of the MK6.
Cuddlebottom fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Feb 23, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2011 14:42
|
|
|
Zhentar posted:Summary for the lazy: it's back up because the guy dropped the issue. He likely had a legitimate copyright claim; while he cannot lay claim to the concept of the Penrose Triangle, he did create a 3D representation of it, and that work is copyrightable. So you can copyright anything you can print? cakesmith handyman fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Feb 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 09:19
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:So you can copyright anything you can print? This is how the fun starts. Is the physical manifestation different from the instructions sent to the 3d printer is different from the Blender file is different from the idea? How about the 3d scan? How about the instructions sent to a Mendel vs. a Cupcake? IP lawyers the world over are typing briefs about this with one hand RIGHT NOW.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 13:06
|
|
|
I don't know, it seems like it would be pretty easy to draw precedent. 3D printing is just an accelerated means of doing things we've been doing for thousands of years - creating patterns to replicate a physical object. Can you copyright or patent a pattern for a piece of clothing? Or blueprints/schematics for a piece of equipment? Can you copyright a particular set of instructions on how to build something? I am certainly not an IP expert, but it seems to me that these things are fundamentally the same as 3D printing - if you can copyright a pattern, it doesn't matter whether someone actually makes it using hand-stitching, a sewing machine, or some sort of fancy computerized stitcher.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 15:16
|
|
|
The big bugbear that everyone is dreading on the horizon isn't copyrights/patents, it's copy protection. Even though DRM on movies, music, games etc. is easily circumvented if you know what you're doing, it's at least there. But a cheap 3D scanner made from a laser pointer and some tape could ostensibly make a virtual copy (and then a real copy with a 3D printer) of almost any physical object imaginable, and there is currently no physical way to prevent that or at even make it difficult.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 15:54
|
|
|
Disclaimer: IANAL.Cakefool posted:So you can copyright anything you can print? No, not even close. However, things that are copyrightable include "pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works", and "architectural works". I would say this falls pretty clearly into 'sculptural', so it can be protected by copyright. Ashcans/Midjack: The instructions for printing it are absolutely copyrightable, but that doesn't present any protection for someone else coming up with their own, original instructions. The ease of doing so is not relevant, so far as I know. It wouldn't matter here, since neither of the infringing works copied those instructions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 16:41
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:I don't know, it seems like it would be pretty easy to draw precedent. 3D printing is just an accelerated means of doing things we've been doing for thousands of years You know, you've actually hit the nail on the head here - perhaps without realizing it. No one cares about copying something by carving it out of wood by hand (for example). Once people think you can just hit a button and BAM done, then it's a problem. Same reason the original "copy-right" on the printed word only reached  proportions when printing presses showed up. Because suddenly it's easy to crank stuff out, whereas before it was a non-issue because the only option was to sit down and literally write out each copy by hand - and who's going to do that? (OK, besides monks making copies of the bible but I trust you get my point.)Sounds familiar to copying electronic books/movies/music doesn't it.  I have an example of my own. I'm into target shooting and it's hard to get a neato new(ish) product from the American company Magpul where I live. (The AFG: http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG411/88 ) The AFG is basically a chunk of plastic. I was working off and on on making my own copy to print out. Now this got me thinking exactly the same thing you allude to. No one would care if I went to my workshop and built one myself out of scrap or whatever. But if I uploaded a design for one to thingiverse.com I can certainly see someone having a problem with it. Not least of which would be Magpul, and understandably so! BUT BUT BUT it's the same as me building one myself! BUT BUT BUT it actually took LONGER to get it 3D designed and printed than if I had just used a piece of scrap wood! BUT BUT BUT I'd buy one if I could but they're not in any shops around here! BUT BUT BUT the end result is nowhere near as nice as the real thing! BUT BUT BUT no one is profiting in any way! BUT BUT BUT ad nauseam
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 03:25 |
|
|
Mister Sinewave posted:You know, you've actually hit the nail on the head here - perhaps without realizing it. quote:The personal computer revolution also casts light on some potential pitfalls that may be in store for the growth of 3D printing. When entrenched interested began to understand just how disruptive personal computing could be (especially massively networked personal computing) they organized in Washington, D.C. to protect their incumbent power. Rallying under the banner of combating piracy and theft, these interests pushed through laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that made it harder to use computers in new and innovative ways. In response, the general public learned once-obscure terms like "fair use" and worked hard to defend their ability to discuss, create, and innovate. Cuddlebottom fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Feb 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2011 20:48
|
|