|
I'm in a similar boat to Ashcans. I've got quite a bit of industry CAD experience, especially Pro/E(ngineer) which does parametric modeling. (skip this part if you know what that is or just don't care) To summarize, you draw the general shape first, then you set with dimensions you want (width, diameter, or the relationship they have, such as perpendicular or such) and only then do you input the numbers you actually want. You can change the values at any time and the model will rearrange itself using the rules already in place. There's also a design tree that records each step you make, and changing an earlier step will flow down to all subsequent steps, even if it breaks something later. Anyway, my issue is that Sketchup seems very limited to me. Are there any free or easily affordable modeling packages with more powerful features, or am I missing an advanced mode for SketchUp? krushgroove posted:Is the RepRap something that can be converted to print metal parts? That said, there's nothing conceptually impossible about it. Someone who is more familiar with RepRap can say more.
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2010 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 13:43 |
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Is this something that's actually currently doable? Because if so that's loving amazing. I didn't think we were anywhere near self-replication/upgrade on these things. I can't wait until the entire thing can print itself, it gets automated, and we can make a von Neumann device! 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2010 00:30
|
|
|
nolen posted:Yeah, would a CNC router be useful for cutting fabric? If I could somehow automate cutting patterns out of fabric, my sewing production time would get cut in half. So, I'm sure there's something out there, but I don't have the chops to find it on google. The ones I know about are for industrial use of exotic materials where price isn't usually a concern and have expensive programs dedicated to dealing with fabric pattern cutting. v  v
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2011 18:43
|
|
|
What temperature do you have to get up to for it to work? Would boiling water pumping through a car radiator be hot enough? Would it be too large/heavy for it to work? I have zero experience with MakerBots and the like, but that might be a cheap way to get a heated surface. You can get radiators effectively free from a junkyard and a pump and heater system for relatively cheap.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
It would make sense for long-term things like the space station, because you can get 10 pounds of generic material and make any replacement parts or tools (or specialized things for an unexpected problem) rather than all the separate replacement parts you might need and will otherwise sit there wasting space. I agree it's a much better solution for some other planetary surface with lots of raw material. I love the lunar sintering robot idea for building roads, for example.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2011 03:47
|
|
|
I was puzzling that myself, and the only way I could imagine it is if could be printed in a compact form that would then unfold or unpack itself to a larger printing form.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2011 09:06
|
|
|
From what some other users have said you can even use the plastic directly, i.e. a lost-plastic method instead of lost-wax, depending on how many you want to make and what quality.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2012 19:21
|
|
|
There really is no comparison with parametric modeling programs like Pro/E, SolidWorks, or CATIA. I would be all over this if licenses weren't so drat expensive, I love doing solid modeling  E: Does anyone have a link to that professional multi-material printer? It was intended for small scale industrial use, not really home consumers, but I can't seem to find it again. They had a really slick video demonstrating the assembly with movable parts and flexible gaskets and such.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2012 15:01
|
|
|
In lighthearted news, I guess we all have this to look forward to in a decade or two: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2851#comic
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
leo_r posted:Currently I'm working on some OpenSCAD stuff, although I'm constantly cursing it. Programming geometry is OK as long as you don't start rotating the frames of reference. Unfortunately I didn't realise that when I started and spent quite a while making different components separately and then rotating and translating them into my main model, leading to really confusing coordinate systems. I still prefer Solidworks! It certainly is an interesting approach to modelling though, and once I've got a design more or less complete the customisable aspects of it will really shine. I think for most modelling though, normal CAD is a better bet. I've been spoiled by multi-thousand dollar CAD programs
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
Man, I had a toy like that as a kid decades ago, it was cool as heck but the markers were specially-shaped and expensive. Guess the patent ran out, I wish I could remember the name. E: COLORBLASTER! Haha so many memories, that thing was 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
That is awesome! I do not have the time nor inclination right now to fiddle with a 3D printer (someday...) but is there a way to get one of those made for a reasonable price? I'd also be interested if I could get a paradoxical gear set made. http://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=-1Gfc1Iq0GY
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2013 13:22
|
|
|
Here's a neat article about modern-day science fiction technologies. 3D printing features in at least two of them, one the printing of a jawbone which I knew about and another the printing of a house (complete with plumbing!) that I didn't. http://myscienceacademy.org/2013/01/03/27-science-fictions-that-became-science-facts-in-2012/ VVV EDIT: Ah, thanks, that would explain why I haven't heard more about it. I'd seen some stuff a while ago and just assumed they had made a lot of progress while I wasn't looking. DarkHorse fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Apr 3, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
Since a significant portion of this thread involves 3D modeling, I think this video may be of interest. It's a way to create a simplified model out of a single 2D image and adjust its properties. Really needs to be seen in action to get the full effect. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oie1ZXWceqM I don't think you can extract the model or anything yet, and it only supports cylindrical and rectangular cross-sections so far, but it looks really neat.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2013 11:53
|
|
|
Just saw a KickStarter for a circuit printer. While it isn't 3D it did crib off of some printer designs, and it still has applications in the 3D printer crowd. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cartesianco/the-ex1-rapid-3d-printing-of-circuit-boards?ref=home_popular I have a feeling the circuits aren't terribly long-lived or have terrible resistive losses, but still very interesting. I wonder how hard it would be to add their print heads to a traditional FDM head.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
I hadn't heard about reliability issues with the Form1, what are some of the things that have happened?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Keep in mind there may be extra requirements for using it in an aquatic environment. Any plastic you use should be resistant to UV and probably a saline environment unless you feel like replacing it every other year.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
I'm willing to bet there will never be a consumer-grade 3D printer that will be able to match Lego tolerances, and any professional-grade 3D printer that could would not be anywhere close to cost-effective for making those bricks. Lego spend a bazillion dollars on the plastic injection-molding equipment for their bricks (and have advanced the state of the art to essentially ~magic~) to the point people cannot compete on cost OR quality. I work in an extremely demanding design field, and even I was amazed at the tolerances they have for those bricks. Regardless, 3D printing is probably not going to replace mass-production techniques. What 3D-printing excels at is making things without expensive custom tooling, so things like prototyping, low-volume, or custom-designed stuff. Once you're making millions of a part the tooling costs start to become inconsequential and per-part cost becomes the driver.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Anyone see the latest kickstarter-printer du jour? https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2117384013/flux-all-in-one-3d-printer-unlimited-elegant-simpl It's an unusual design, I'm curious to see what kind of precision you get with it. I'm still trying to decide if having the head move in ways not in line with the stepper motors' actuation buys you something, either increased precision or error reduction or something, or if it just makes the programming that much more complicated for no reason.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
mcbagpipes posted:A friend of mine is looking to make some D&D dice and is thinking of using a 3d printing service like shapeways.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
deimos posted:You can tap FDM as insta said but you should make the hole in the design to be drilled and tapped (the drill should be taking a minimal amount of material off it's really just to make the hole consistent for the tap). If the screw is small enough you don't even need to tap it (M2.5 is almost never tapped and you just let the screw do the tapping). Yeah, look up machinists' charts for proper drill size to tap X hole. If you plan on assembling and disassembling a bunch, and you want your part to last a while, you may also want to look into threaded metal inserts. You tap a larger diameter once, then screw them in to serve as more permanent threads of the size you want. Tapping directly into the plastic is almost always sufficient, though make sure you have enough wall material and support if you don't have full infill.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Thought people in this thread would appreciate this: the ISS just had a spanner design sent up for their 3D printer: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2387953/space-station-commander-is-emailed-a-much-needed-spanner
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
If you've modeled that cylinder as a solid, do a Boolean intersection (Subtract or Cut) and it will leave the hole. You may need to extend the cylinder a little farther on the flat face so it completely cuts through it, otherwise you may get weird glitches. Alternatively, there should be an option to extrude "Up to Next surface" or "Up to Selected surface" - pick the curved face, and it will extrude through that. I can't remember the exact names or locations in the menus, because it's been a few years since I did SolidWorks and most of my experience is with Pro/E and UG/NX, but every parametric modeling program has some form of those options.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Geirskogul posted:I've been fooling with SolidWorks, and I have a question: do other programs like Blender or Sketchup have similar "dimensional constraint" figures? Like, can I make a cylinder with a hole through it and specify the cylinder and the hole's dimensions that translate to the generated stl, or do I have to gently caress with scaling after the fact? Solidworks (or any other parametric modeling software) can do either easily. There should be a "Scale" option where you apply a size factor to the entire part. Another option is to use user-defined parameters, like setting "thickness=2.5 cm" and "height=thickness/2" or something like that. Changing the value for "thickness" will automatically update the height, and so on. The specific implementation will vary depending on your program. For best results, you'll want to properly apply physical or geometric constraints to your model; if you want a hole centered in the part, either use midpoint constraints, or define dimensions with equations like above, or use construction geometry, rather than a constant value. Otherwise, changing your part size might change where your hole is located on the part. I'm also curious what is difficult to begin with a sketch but is easier with some other method.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
ManiacClown posted:How much am I looking at for a good resin printer that can handle both small and large-ish things? As with most SLA systems, your biggest long-term cost will be the photosensitive resin, which can run hundreds of dollars per liter.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Fluorescent lights put out a lot of UV, and incandescent bulbs put out some as well. The bottles the resin comes in should block most of it, but if you have some resin left over in a tank you should store it away from any light. At my old job they had special yellow fluorescent bulbs to cut down on exposure, but even those would initiate a reaction given enough time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
This might be beyond middle schoolers, but you could try designing bridges or other structures and reward things like max carrying capacity, best strength to weight ratio, most creative, etc. Phone covers is another good one, and maybe use it to instruct calculating volume and other measurement skills.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
I wish they would just license the technology. I would buy a Form1 with the permeable membrane for 4k - the only reason I haven't bought a Form1 already is because I hate the idea of throwing away those huge trays all the time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Here's a neat video of 3D printed glass from MIT https://vimeo.com/136764796
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
rawrr posted:JB clearweld. I originally bought it to repair a glass bubbler, and it actually worked great for structural glass repairs (though the epoxy has a yellow tint). I say that because I managed to break it again in a similar way, but it broke in a different location than where I had epoxied it. As for carbon fiber, I honestly might not even wait for it to get tacky; with hand-layup when you're not super concerned about weight you just slop on the epoxy, press the fabric into it, then add another coat and put another layer on. You want the epoxy/matrix embedded in your fabric, so soaking it through is best. The only downside to this is increased weight (because more epoxy) and reduced strength (because the matrix is weaker than your fibers), but for a surface finish it doesn't matter.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
It'll depend on the type of fabric you have. Plainweave is generally stiffer and doesn't drape as well as something like 8-harness-satin, but you should be able to get it to lie down if you keep pushing and shoving it around. Try doing it dry first and nudge the fibers around until you think you've got an idea of how to place it, and then apply your epoxy and start from some center point and work your way around and out. Make sure you have an epoxy that leaves you enough time to work. If your shape is too extreme you may need to make some selective cuts or darts to get things to lie down well enough. That's going to be a lot easier than trying to get a molding operation to work unless you have experience with it. If you want a super-nice surface finish you can make a female mold and try vacuum-bagging it, but that will also be a lot of effort and has a lot of unique challenges depending on your geometry. DarkHorse fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Oct 25, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Yep. Kinematically, if you're measuring the position of something, the first derivative of the position is velocity, second derivative is acceleration, third derivative is jerk (the rate of change of the acceleration). At least in Marlin, jerk doesn't actually follow that definition, but it has a similar functionality so I guess they felt the name was close enough.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
What were those two free parametric 3D modeling programs people suggested earlier? I neglected to write them down and I can't find the relevant posts. E: Found them, Fusion3D and OnShape DarkHorse fucked around with this message at 17:19 on Sep 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
I don’t know poo poo about printing other than through osmosis, but cheap ventilation can be had using the big computer case fans running at low rpm and flexible dryer ducting from a big box hardware store. Make a big enclosure around everything, have a fan pulling air out of the enclosure into the ductwork, and maybe another pulling out of the duct and to the outside depending how long it is. Keep the areas of openings and ducts close to the same size as the fans and you will be fine. Obviously only necessary if you’re worried about plastics volatiles offgassing.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
That’s a great compact build!  Do you have the STL? I think my friend would be interested in printing one of those on his Form2
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2018 13:02
|
|
|
I’ve done parametric modeling as part of my job, and I really like OnShape for its capabilities as a free software solution and with pretty decent app support. I can no longer judge how hard it is for complete new people to get into it, but it has 90% of the power of $2,000/license modeling packages. I’m not certain how good it is at outputting solid models however.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2018 03:01
|
|
|
csammis posted:Perfect for your drow-based RPG setting!  Glad I’m not the only turbo nerd whose mind immediately went here
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
cakesmith handyman posted:What mass are you moving? What's the power source? Is the motive power moving or stationary? Do you want something captive on the rail or just riding on it? What speed do you imagine achieving? What sort of control do you need (steady speed or variable? Quick reverse?) Is there a single rail or more? Yeah there’s a lot of engineering that could go into this depending on what you’re trying to do, you’ll need to provide more specifics to make sure what people say will be adequate for your intended use.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Intuition tells me cable and pulley are going to be most cost effective over that distance. The question will be level of precision you’ll get since you’re testing other devices based on that. Between sag, stretch, backlash, thermal expansion, etc you’re probably going to get +/- 10cm over 50m, more with longer lengths. If you want down to the centimeter you’ll probably want to control position directly rather than relying on motor position because over that length even braided steel cable will stretch a bit, but that would involve a control loop and running optical code strips down the entire length or something of similar complexity. On the plus side, if you do that you can use PVC pipe or something similarly cheap for the rail. Another alternative if you’re testing lots of distance gauges is just wing the distance for most of your measurements, get your measurements, and use statistics to figure out the likely distance, then corroborate it with a few test measurements with a long tape.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2018 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 13:43 |
|
|
Parts Kit posted:Yeah I remember you've done some rad stuff in tfr over the years. There's some target shooting stuff on thingiverse if you search by the model/make of what you're looking for, but I don't know about their policy on it. What blows my mind is there are 22lr silencer models there, which for the non-tfr folks means instant felony time. Yeah they can’t be curating it too tightly if they’re letting several .22lr suppressor models sit there out in the open for a year Or I guess everyone that printed those models could’ve done the $200 tax stamp and 6+ month wait for the ATF to say they could 3d print a $0.60 part v v
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2018 21:51
|
|
