polyoptics

Thanks all for the replies and all the great information. I did decide in the end that although the Ultimaker is an amazing printer, it's not for me. Extra thanks to Daid for the amazing help. Sorry for my late reply, but I though I should update the thread. I based my decision on: - my lack of engineering knowledge for making repairs, which will be needed from time to time. - the current state of support structures and the configuration of open source software parameters in general. I think something like the cube is a better fit for me, in terms of user friendliness. However the resolution is not fine enough. Also, although it has an excellent snap off support system, what is really needed is a dissolvable support material. I will continue to wait (impatiently) for the 3d printer that best matches my needs to be developed.

Awesome Daid, thanks for the information! Don't worry about the larger one, its probably not worth the trouble of the shipping and everything -- its easy to get over excited about 3d printing for me. Looks really really nice, Im super interested in the support structure still, so def post up some images if you end up testing this some more. AWESOME!!!

Wow Daid that's so cool! I am surprised at the quality too! It seems like it might be smoother than it looks, due to the transparency and being able to see into the surface a little at the crosshatch lines? A few questions: - what is the layer size or resolution of the print? - how long did the clean up process take? - what are the chances of the radar part coming out ok, with all the tiny details? - I wonder how much easier the clean up would be and supports to remove, at double the size? - I looks like the support structures printer actually quite well, was it hard to setup? Also, if you printed one at 11cm, measured diagonally from front left foot the back right foot, as nice as you can, I would gladly pay you double the material cost and double the shipping cost (or what ever you want really) to send it to me in New York, so I can take a look!! That's so awesome man! Thanks for running a test through!!!

Interesting, I suppose there is no perfect solution yet! -- I sent along the radarFox file, let me know if you get a chance to play, and thanks so much, again, for all your help!! On a side note, I wonder when we can expect Ultimaker2.0 ??

Thanks Daid, I realize you are biased, I think its a good way to get some critical feedback on the Replicator. Regarding the points you mentioned, that I am unsure of: 1)- Filament size -- Cost aside, are there any differences with the thinner filament size? Why do you think MBI went this route? I found this but I am not sure what implications that may or may not have on quality: >>1.75 requires less torque, so you can turn the current down on the stepper. >>1.75 requires more steps for the same flow, but in reverse this gives better flow control especially with a small nozzle. 2) Print speed -- is not an issue for me, unless faster prints can impact the quality in a positive way, which seems counter intuitive, but I may have read something about faster speeds creating thinner threads of plastic and higher quality ?? 3) heated printer bed -- I do like this, even for PLA it seems to help - on the Ultimaker with PLA wouldn't a HPB help with quality, even slightly? 4) Ultimaker uses the boden extruder, not sure what the Replicator uses, but there are pros and cons for each correct? TOM vs the Replicator: 1) - The TOM uses the mk7 extruder, and the replicator the mk8, I have no idea what the difference is there, do you? Here is what I found, but it still leaves me vexed: > > * What is the difference between the MK8 and MK7 extruders? > > Mk8 is just a Mk7 with an angle on the nose of the extruder. We wanted > an angled nose on the Mk7, but some manufacturers tolerances made it > hard to get right. 2) - Also, the TOM has the moving platform and the Replicator uses the 'ultimaker style' moving extruder, which should show improvement in quality, correct? From researching it seems the old fashioned moving build platform on the TOM, is enough reason to make the Replicator a 'better' printer .. perhaps? I see what you mean about there not being a huge difference between the TOM and the Replicator though. --- As for my radarFox model. Yes I would absolutely love for you to test some thing on it, if you don't mind!!! It's a model that I would never want to go public (at this time) but I feel very confident that I can trust you with that. Maybe you can PM me your email address and I can send over the file tonight. Would you prefer the file as STL? Thanks Daid for taking the time to chat about this with me, I am seriously ignorant when it comes to the details. I really appreciate it and I hope I am not trying your patients too much! :oops:

Thanks Daid -- I also found this larger example, which is promising: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3856 Regarding Replicator and Ultimaker -- I get the feeling after reading a lot about them both, that Ultimaker is easier to get higher details with. As far as the Replicator goes, it does have dual extruders which may (or may not) prove to be extremely valuable, however it seems that getting down to, and below, 0.1 mm is a tougher task? Personally, the idea of a prebuilt kit, although not really in the spirit of true DIY, is very appealing to someone like me. I can see why MBI is going that route, for now. As for the Replicator being the latest printer with the most stuff... I can only imagine that we will see a new Ultimaker kit at some point in the near-ish future. Interestingly, the ultimaker forums seem to be quite well developed and active VS the makerbot forums. Both printers use different extruders (correct?) Daid, how do you feel about the Replicator and Ultimaker -- I know they both have pros and cons .. - I am curious what your thoughts are regarding these two machines and how they approach 3d printing in different ways. Its possible this topic hasn't been beaten to death yet, right?

Are you using a printer with dual extruders? Also, some info on Slic3r and Replicator here: http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?263,1 ... 86,quote=1 If you ever get to test this, please post your results!

That's a huge difference there, awesome!! At this point I feel pretty confident in the print quality, although the software looks a little challenging, it seems the hardware is up to the task, and then some. For the past few days I have been obsessing over support structures. I had never considered that as a factor before, but it seems now that this is more a limiting issue than the resolution. I havn't had much luck, except for some old posts from 2010 where some people are using PLA as a dissolvable support via hard chemicals. I have seen the printed moving gear images from flicker using this technique with PVA (the guys name escapes me),but I am pretty sure he is not using a makerbot or ultimaker.. TOM? And that he may even be modeling the support structure himself and merging stl files. This has me looking at the new makerbot replicator, although there is no proof yet, just talk, it seems like a dual extruder and PVA could be an amazing asset for creating supports from safely dissolvable material. I realize that most any printer can be moded with an extra extruder, but being a not so tech savy person, it's a major plus to be able to buy a pre assembled kit with dual extruders. The stopping point seems to be the software. It seems to be so new (dual extruding pla, and pva support material) that there are no existing tests and therefore only speculation about what software may or may not support this feature. It seems at the best of times, support structure has taken a back seat to other issues, perhaps this new-ish technique with dual extruders will push things along a little faster? That could be a long wait... meanwhile, affordable liquid resin printing ( looks incredible) is slowly starting to pop up here and there in prototype videos and images. Thoughts?

Hey they turned out pretty good!! I have been really amazed these past few weeks seeing how far things have come just in the last couple of years. I think for my purposes, its clear that I am expecting a little too much from the machine at this time, but its **SO** close. I imagine in the next year or 2, I will take the plunge. Until then I will continue to keep a close watch here. Thanks so much Daid, and all the early adopters, for paving the way!

Hah Yes those are scary photos. It would seem, as you mentioned, that printing in pieces is really the way to go for this sort of stuff! Any pics of complex objects that have been assembled from multiple parts to avoid this? Your dragon hand was a good example and turned out really well by the way!

Thanks Daid for your response! I have been rereading it and doing research since your post. You've been extremely helpful!! It seems that support structures and models with undercuts/overhangs aren't really a hot topic, and I fear that although things are moving at a really high pace (regarding software/hardware) these issues aren't at the top of the list for development. I could be wrong on that, of course. I wish I could find some information on anyone (just one person!) who is using the Ultimaker in the same way that intend on using it - to print character models, which will consist almost 100% with complex overhangs and protruding details. Which sort of leads me to believe that there must be reason for that. Still a huge part of me just wants to take the plunge and see what happens!! I wonder what printers are on the horizon and what Ultimaker2.0 will be capable of... ?

While researching, it seems that most of the sub 80 micron prints are done with Netfab/Marlin, is this true? If so, is there any reason for this, or coincidence/personal preference?

Any pics of prints with support structures? You don't see many models with undercuts/overhangs -- i'd love to see any examples of this, if they exist!

He's certainly figured things out but I think he did those things while still pretty much a newbie. For the heatsink, the original Ultimaker kits came with smaller motors. These worked fine but could get really hot on long prints. A number of people put heatsinks and/or fans on them to keep the temperature down - I put fans on mine, not because it made the machine better but because I was sick of touching the motors by mistake. Not hot enough to actually damage skin but I sure knew it when I touched one. Ultimaker started including bigger motors around October or so, which run far cooler. I upgrade my machine to use these for about US$20/motor and now, even after like 5 hours of continuous printing, the motors are just over room temperature.. So.. Worthwhile investment for batch-1 machines, already fixed on new machines. Ahh I see! Thanks for the clarification -- I believe he also added the LCD screen and SD card reader, I may have read that that kit also comes with an improved way to read the temperature? Also, he mentions that in some of his blue prints he had stripes of black material as a result of sealing something around the extruder area (where he used black plastic), is that part of the regular build or an extra procedure? --Excuse my ignorance here please Do you think that these modifications (which I could *probably* do) are essential for printing at very high quality levels? The stock kit comes with a fan mounted on the extruder (doesn't it?) for which I can print the fan shroud modification as Daid has mentioned, and the belt tensioners. Are there any other essential mods for high quality printing? I have read about feeder tube clips on both ends and modifications to the main.. (ugh i don't know the terminology yet, sorry) pipe that the material comes through to avoid backups and blockage etc... I'm not sure how much of this will be needed, and I fear some of those fixes (although not mandatory) may become necessary if I encounter a problem, and are out of scope as someone without access (and skills) to proper tools and a workshop. That is some messy post... sorry for that! Do you get what I mean though?

Is it just your cat and anticipation that keeps you watching the prints, or is there something you need to do while it prints or watch out for? I have noticed that almost all the prints I see do not have overhangs/undercuts, is there any reason for this? Have you had any experience with models that need a lot of support structures? I will be trying to print this specifically (shown here is the shapeways print): I wonder if the radar piece could be printed as one part, or if I would need to split it up and manage the model to make the print possible, or model my own support structures, which I am not sure how to do with some of these thin curved surfaces with protruding details. -- that is one thing I liked about Shapeways. :roll: Eventually I would like to try and print the big white guys shown here (shapeways print): As you can see around the folded arms there are tons of undercuts, gaps and ..areas that would need supports, like the elbow? Would these fit into a 'difficult to print' category?