Re: PowderMaker1 3DP printer
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:12 pm
hello, this is my first post on this fantastic forum, and I take the chance to explain why I'm here. I'm operating a 3DS Projet 660 since a few years, so I have quite a bit hands on experience with this technology. Problem is that this printer (the one I own) sucks so much that I'm seriously considering developing my own.
This PowderMaker1 design show here looks really nice, I'm wondering what commercial price level are you aiming at, and when you think it would be ready for sales, even single modules (e.g. heads controller)
A couple of advices though:
1. the main problem of these printers is, as dragonator points out, the powder. 80% of the issues of the 660, and half ot the aborted prints, are due to the powder going litterally everywhere, dirtying electric contacts, ruining printheads, falling from the axes and making a rough build surface. So don't underestimate the powder mess... in particular, the desing is missing a sort of cover that protects to some extent the room were the printer operates.
2. build volume. These printers have three axes, the Y axis (where the printheads move) is the fastest and should be the largest dimension, as it is in your design. The X axis is the slow axis, and should be the second largest dimension. The Z axis is by far the slowest, and should be the smallest dimension.
In this case the difference between X and Z axis is only 1cm, so not a big deal, but consider inverting the X and Z sizes if you still can. Every print job you will do will always be oriented so that largest dimension is along the Y axis and the smallest on the Z axis, because doing otherwise can turn a 2 hours job into a 15 hours job, printing the same part !
3. consider a vacuum system. The build volume is deep enough that you wont be able to extract the parts without it.
Now something about the materials:
for the powder I suggest you to start with 3dsystems PXL, at least for the experimental stages. It's really the only one that spreads really smoothly. If you can't spread that one smoothly you know you have to fine tune the spreader, while with normal plaster you may not know if the issue is the roller or the plaster. It costs a fortune but has the proper granulometry mix and, especially, the grains (I have a few microscope photos I'll post later) are fairly smooth, nearly spherical (as opposed to the plaster you can buy at LeroyMerlin or similar places) and spread really smooth. I suspect this is the main reason for the high cost.
for the liquids, transparent: just plain demineralized water added with the necessary percentage of IPA will do. I use this since long time and half an hour after the print is completed the parts are perfectly cured and hard, they do not even need to be infiltrated with CyanoAcrilate, which is otherwise mandatory using the usual mix of water/glicerine/surfactant. Getting rid of CA is a big, big, BIG advantage.
I can't tell you the % of IPA because it is head dependant, if your head could print pure water, pure water would be perfectly OK, because IPA is only necessary to render the necessary viscosity and surface tension for the head to jet, but the solvent (for plaster/PXL) is just the water.
For colors is a bit more complex , it requires procuring inkjet color (amazon is fine) and to find the right dilution with water. That's it....
good luck with the project, seems really promising
Massimo
This PowderMaker1 design show here looks really nice, I'm wondering what commercial price level are you aiming at, and when you think it would be ready for sales, even single modules (e.g. heads controller)
A couple of advices though:
1. the main problem of these printers is, as dragonator points out, the powder. 80% of the issues of the 660, and half ot the aborted prints, are due to the powder going litterally everywhere, dirtying electric contacts, ruining printheads, falling from the axes and making a rough build surface. So don't underestimate the powder mess... in particular, the desing is missing a sort of cover that protects to some extent the room were the printer operates.
2. build volume. These printers have three axes, the Y axis (where the printheads move) is the fastest and should be the largest dimension, as it is in your design. The X axis is the slow axis, and should be the second largest dimension. The Z axis is by far the slowest, and should be the smallest dimension.
In this case the difference between X and Z axis is only 1cm, so not a big deal, but consider inverting the X and Z sizes if you still can. Every print job you will do will always be oriented so that largest dimension is along the Y axis and the smallest on the Z axis, because doing otherwise can turn a 2 hours job into a 15 hours job, printing the same part !
3. consider a vacuum system. The build volume is deep enough that you wont be able to extract the parts without it.
Now something about the materials:
for the powder I suggest you to start with 3dsystems PXL, at least for the experimental stages. It's really the only one that spreads really smoothly. If you can't spread that one smoothly you know you have to fine tune the spreader, while with normal plaster you may not know if the issue is the roller or the plaster. It costs a fortune but has the proper granulometry mix and, especially, the grains (I have a few microscope photos I'll post later) are fairly smooth, nearly spherical (as opposed to the plaster you can buy at LeroyMerlin or similar places) and spread really smooth. I suspect this is the main reason for the high cost.
for the liquids, transparent: just plain demineralized water added with the necessary percentage of IPA will do. I use this since long time and half an hour after the print is completed the parts are perfectly cured and hard, they do not even need to be infiltrated with CyanoAcrilate, which is otherwise mandatory using the usual mix of water/glicerine/surfactant. Getting rid of CA is a big, big, BIG advantage.
I can't tell you the % of IPA because it is head dependant, if your head could print pure water, pure water would be perfectly OK, because IPA is only necessary to render the necessary viscosity and surface tension for the head to jet, but the solvent (for plaster/PXL) is just the water.
For colors is a bit more complex , it requires procuring inkjet color (amazon is fine) and to find the right dilution with water. That's it....
good luck with the project, seems really promising
Massimo