RE: [rp-ml] SLS vs SL for small part / small feature capability / accuracy.

From: Steve Stewart <>
Date: Wed Jul 12 2006 - 19:22:46 EEST

I believe Scott was asking about contrasting just the two sintering
machines/processes. All I can tell you is that in a "head-to-head"
comparison of both 3D's machine and EOS's machine, both using virgin
powder, we were not able to discern any significant difference in the
detail built. Both built far better than we expected, but of course not
as detailed as SLA or Eden.
The nominal "laser spot size" for beam compensation purposes on our EOS
P385 is .023". As you know, this isn't really the size of the beam, but
the size of the smallest dot you can make, as the powder tends to
-Steve Stewart
Protogenic, Inc.


From: [] On
Behalf Of DeFonce, Ron C
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 8:17 AM
To: Scott Tilton;
Subject: RE: [rp-ml] SLS vs SL for small part / small feature capability
/ accuracy.

Scott, I disagree with that claim from results I've seen from SLS vs.
other technologies, such as SLA and FDM processes.
The Viper has the HR mode which uses a .003 inch spot size. FDM's Eden
machines create super-fine detailed parts; maybe the best for small
The advantage of SLS (my opinion anyhow) is the durability of parts, not
it's ability to produce fine details.
Ron DeFonce


From: Scott Tilton []
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 5:44 PM
Subject: [rp-ml] SLS vs SL for small part / small feature capability /

Hi all,


Thanks for the past input I got regarding different plastic sintering
systems from 3D and EOS.


Sorry to beat a dead horse - but I'm still looking for more opinions.


I've heard one claim that the DTM / 3D SLS system was better for
accurately producing small parts or small features.

Possibly due to a smaller spot size?


Is this marketing hype?

Does anyone have a different opinion or experience?


Perhaps some RP-ML'ers over in Europe might know better.

They've had access to both manufacturers for a while longer than us


Thanks in advance.



Scott Tilton

Received on Wed Jul 12 18:36:49 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jul 21 2009 - 10:27:52 EEST