Am 27.06.2013 19:42, schrieb Mullen, John:
> Some do it well others don't.
Thanks for all the answers, let me pick this one as an example.
You see, some do well. And that's the most important difference between
these self built printers and the $2000 and up models: you have to
choose. There is so much choice (rubbish to excellent software, rubbish
to excellent mechanics) to the extent there isn't even a brand. Reading
things like "this cheapo printer printed ..." makes me cringe a bit.
Which software, which controller, which extruder, which layer thickness,
which head moving speed ... ? For example, reducing the layer thickness
to get smoother surfaces is a matter of a minute, but you have to know
about this and you have to do it. Accordingly, considering one of these
printer models to print at a fixed, given quality is pretty pointless.
BTW., none of the two initial writers asked for software comfort,
accuracy or build time, so the sturdiness of the mechanics doesn't
matter much. Even the weakest printer can print accurate if it prints
slow and (almost) every printer can print fast if you don't care about
accuracy.
This picture was discussed a year and a half ago in the RepRap
community, showing a print of a (back then) well tuned cheap printer vs.
an expensive one at standard (the only possible?) settings. You can see
a substantially higher quality on the cheap one:
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6190/6129585407_2d4609e003_o.jpg
You get the point? Thanks :-)
Markus
Blog post I picked the picture from:
http://blog.reprap.org/2011/09/tipping-point-of-print-quality-open.html
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
Received on Thu Jun 27 2013 - 22:56:58 EEST
