Researching New 3D printers for office upgrade

[PaddyMack 0]

New to the forum here.

 

I am investigating new printers for our architectural office.

I would like to hear from end users about Ultimaker S5 and/or S7.

We are an architectural firm of about 65 people.

I run the shop which includes 3, 3D printers, a laser cutter, a CNC router and various wood and metal working machines and tools.

Our printers are:

 

Two older Makerbot replicators, 9 year old and an 8 year old. (still serviceable)

One larger format machine that will remain nameless.

 

The Makerbots have exceeded expectations, but are getting long in the tooth.

Because of the Makerbots overall good service, Ultimaker is attractive.

The larger format machine has been nothing but a disappointment...

I print PLA but would be open to other reliable, rigid materials (material is not that important)

What is important is: reliability, reliability and reliability.

 

I do not want to spend my time tinkering with finicky machines...or resending failed prints.

I understand maintenance and care are part of the game, but I don't want to be 3D printer mechanic.

I'm a maker, I want to make stuff. My clients (the staff here) want results.

 

Cameras, extra features, ability to print millions of different materials are not high on my list.

Making reliable, reasonably good (not super-high res) quality parts in a timely manner are.

 

How are these Ulimaker machines in this regard?

How easy is it to get parts and service?

 

I would love to hear experiences good or bad from folks not affiliated directly with Ultimaker.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Patrick

 

 

Thanks in advance to anyone willing to share their experiences.

 

Regards,

 

Patrick

[kris 29]

Hi Patrick

 

The S- series are reliable machines, no question about it. Also true for the UM2+ Connect. We operate them in our print farm. They do however suffer from some hardware and also software issues (can be more specific if you like .. let me know). 

However, we have lately come to the conclusion that Ultimakers are completely outperformed by the Bambulab X1C in every single aspect. At only a fraction of the cost. 

So, depending on you build volume requirements, the X1C would certainly be a better choice. Sorry if this seems out of place here. But that is my personal experience. Hope it helps. 

Cheers

Kris

[gavinf 1]

The Ulimaker S5 works well when it works. When it breaks, its software and online guides are anti-user and generally unfriendly. If you buy an ultimaker, buy the best most comprehensive warranty so that you can send it in every 2 months, because fixing things yourself is often prohibitively hard. 

[DDoove 3]

I've been using the S5 since it's release and upgraded to pro bundle when that was released. I've been quite happy with it. It does sometimes come with errors especially when it becomes older (>3 years with an average of at least 60h printing per week), but after a while you will know how to fix most of them.

We also have a BambuLab X1E since a few months, it does print faster, but it also comes with errors, less though.

In general I really need the water soluble support material (PVA) for decent quality complex geometries, I use the "Support for PLA" from Bambulab, but it takes a lot of time and effort to get it off (if even possible) in small corners and grooves.

So if I had to choose 1 printer, I'd still go for the S5/S7 pro bundle, but the second printer would definitely be a Bambulab.

I've attached my findings so far, if you have questions, let me know.

Edited March 28 by DDoove

[Dadkitess 19]

I don't have a Bumbulab at work / home myself, but do have a UMS5.

 

I would tend to approve every single line except the speed single material that I would set to 1 : it's horribly slow and there is nothing you can do to accelerate it, its max flow rate is really poor.

 

You might want to add the "perfect first layer" that would get an honest 5 with UMS5 : I've never ever ever ever failed a single first layer, be it with Polycarbonate, PA12-CF, PETG, PVA, etc.

 

But on the opposite it lacks something about overall design flaws, the chance to get a failed print, which is definitely WAY too high if you use PVA as a daily support. Damn, that thing is horrendous, especially the Ultimaker official one. And the dedicated printcore, the BB, don't seem to help at all. It will jam so often, it will trigger the flow sensor, it won't stick to itself, to PLA, it... It's endless. You really have to have proper "basic" simple shape, with very classic parameters, and a re-dried spool to ensure a long print to success. Unfortunately, this 2 printcores configuration is the reason to be of the UMS5, there is nothing else that set it apart, nothing, except maybe that incredible first layer.

 

So yeah, I would mitigate the overall review of UMS5 with a note on the PVA / 2 printcore configuration that is an absolute must BUT it will work only time to time and will lead to a lot of frustration. And since, apart from that and the first layer, the print speed is atrociously slow and will have ghosting even at 25 mm/s + very expensive spool + very expensive printer at all + quite noisy + really not ergonomic + multiple errors + CURA that tends to be the best AND the worst slicer sometimes + build quality issues, etc, it's hard to recommend except when, well, Soluble Support.

 

I'm really looking forward a Bambulab IDEX. And I need to see how a Prusa XL would not do exactly the same job as the UMS5 while also correcting most of it flaws by a good margin.

[DDoove 3]

I dont share this experience with PVA, I often print complex geometry parts which take several days with Ultimaker (T)PLA and PVA and it rarely fails. The only thing we have trouble with is when the printer unloads the material and reloads it again. Most of the time it then breaks somewhere within the bowden tube. I always cut the filament after it has unloaded to remove all material that has been through a bowden tube.

Other problems are mostly because the spool has been within the material station for too long. A new spool generally solves the problem then.

I don't tweak the print settings alot. Mostly infill type and density, print speed for (PLA up to 70mm/sec), core temperature, and bed adhesion type. For support I change to PVA when needed and then choose if all support is printed with PVA or only floor and roof. Other than these I tend to stick to the generic presets.

 

Maybe I'm still satisfied because I only have experience with Ultimaker 3 and S5, Bambulab X1E and Ender 5 Max and don't search for the limits of these printers.

 

29 minutes ago, Dadkitess said:

But on the opposite it lacks something about overall design flaws, the chance to get a failed print, which is definitely WAY too high if you use PVA as a daily support. Damn, that thing is horrendous, especially the Ultimaker official one. And the dedicated printcore, the BB, don't seem to help at all. It will jam so often, it will trigger the flow sensor, it won't stick to itself, to PLA, it... It's endless. You really have to have proper "basic" simple shape, with very classic parameters, and a re-dried spool to ensure a long print to success.

 

 

Edited March 28 by DDoove

[Dadkitess 19]

Sooo... You actually manage to get high successful rate when using the PVA as "interface support" only, the rest of the support being made with T-PLA ? Because I really won't exceed 60-70% of success when doing so, it tends to not stick the T-PLA for the floor unfortunately. It would help a LOT since it would reduce the PVA printing by 90% probably, reducing also the time, the scars left because of PrintCore changes, etc.

 

Never found proper advices / tips about it unfortunately.

[DDoove 3]

Yes, correct. Easy 90% success rate.

Most of the times Fast or Normal Engineering profile.

with PVA as support I print up to a speed of 60 mm/sec with mostly TPLA but also PLA.

I change Roof and floor thickness to 1 mm, for easy removal within grooves. It does take several days of bathing before it is finally dissolved. If time is of the essence I print all support with PVA.

I change the setting Minimum X/Y offset to 0, but I don't think that really does something anymore.

 

I only use the normal support structure by the way, the Tree structure often failed.

 

11 minutes ago, Dadkitess said:

Sooo... You actually manage to get high successful rate when using the PVA as "interface support" only, the rest of the support being made with T-PLA ? Because I really won't exceed 60-70% of success when doing so, it tends to not stick the T-PLA for the floor unfortunately. It would help a LOT since it would reduce the PVA printing by 90% probably, reducing also the time, the scars left because of PrintCore changes, etc.

 

Never found proper advices / tips about it unfortunately.

 

[Dadkitess 19]

Ok, Thanks for your feedback, I definitely need to understand how to fix that issue on our side...

 

By any chance, did you use the Ultimaker PETG as well ? I'm trying to switch to this material to replace the T-PLA, which is too limited when it comes to heat resistance.

[DDoove 3]

@Dadkitess, no, unfortunately we rarely print with PETG so far.