Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Dlp software

Expand Messages
  • Francis Leach
    Graham I only expressed an opinion but seem to have touched many a nerve. My personal opinions are only based on the things I have previously read on this
    Message 1 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
    Graham

    I only expressed an opinion but seem to have touched many a nerve.

    My personal opinions are only based on the things I have previously read on this forum and the way in which some people assumed the technical high ground in all that they reply to other peoples opinions. Your previous reply to me is a case in point.

    I merely offered my post as a checkpoint, to ensure that we appreciate were we are going and what is an acceptable goal rather than just convincing ourselves that finished solidprinted model with obvious build lines are completely acceptable.
    Is it acceptable to have a solidprinted model that one has to fill the build lines or smooth the surface before it is usable?. Is it acceptable to have a solid-print that is brittle and too fragile?
    I am not a jeweller I am a precision scale modeller. I do not polish anything. I use silicon mould to create waxes and vacuum investment casting to cast replicas.  I can have finger prints cast almost. 

    If an FDM solution is right for you, brilliant. If a model with build lines is acceptable to you is okay, brilliant. You are right not everyone need surface smoothness and are happy to make the value judgement but they are useless to me and I expressed that as my opinion. 

    The Envisiontec machines also excellent machines  and equal to the Solidscape machine but printing costs are silly money. In my opinion, the test of quality for model making purposes is scale fidelity. There is zero point of solidprinting for model making if you can not resolve fine detail on surfaces because the general surface is furrowed with build lines which have to be smoothed away with the potential of obliterating is detail. 

    Attached is a scale model of a pantograph which was successfully cast from Solidscape waxes. Download the free viewer from http://www.solidworks.com/sw/support/edrawings/e2_downloadcheck.htm

    Also attached is a render image of a Westinghouse pump. If any body wants an STL file from it to test. Feel free to ask.

    Agent Provocateur  ;0)



    On 16 November 2012 00:19, Graham Stabler <grezmos@...> wrote:
     

    "You have a bad attitude"

    Thanks for letting me know .... But best not to get personal

    You are making big assumptions about the uses people wish to put 3d printers to, a zcorp can directly print moulds for the casting of metal parts or parts for investment casting of large parts. Look feel is a useful use of a 3d printer. But that was just an example, apparently if it is of no use to you it is useless.

    I have a commercial FDM printer from dimension but the DLP based printers beat it resolution wise and we have seen some good examples of patterns for jewellery as it happens, I wonder if you have seen them? Check in the photo section, I think the folder is something like "seas 3d printer"

    Michael has already done 20um layers with his B9 creator and there is nothing to stop the layer thickness being reduced further, a chase of optics on the projector could also lead to finer lateral resolution with associated smaller build size.

    Graham


    On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
     

    Yes

    Useless and too fragile to be usable for anything other that "look feel" examples.

    You have a bad attitude 


    On 15 November 2012 23:37, Graham Stabler <grezmos@...> wrote:
     

    Not everyone is interested in jewellery applications and finishes ready for casting and that is not the only industrial context. I can only assume that zcorps powder based printers are failures in your opinion?


    Graham


    On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
     

    Chris


    I have admired your work at every stage and your drive to an effective solid printing system is a to be applauded. I wish to thank you for your amazing contributions and long may you succeed.

    I do not wish to pour rain on some other peoples parties but the optimal solution is yet to be devised. 

    Examples of  "printed solutions" seen from "successful" experimenters would be regarded as total failures in a industrial context. Not a single solution yet seen is commercially acceptable. If we were to believe that we have achieved the goal of parity we are deluding ourselves. In my opinion, none of the current own grown machines are acceptable in terms of build finish.

    What is sought should be is a solution that is equal to or better than that obtainable from the best of commercial source at a price we can afford.

    I use commercial solid printers a lot and the best resolution for small items ( less than 40mm long x 30mm wide ) are only obtainable from Solidscape machines using 2  waxes with differentiated melting points as the printed media.
    Typically these are used in the finest of jewellery applications. The machines are mega expensive and totally beyond the reach of most private modellers. No other commercial machines come any way close to the surface finish that I would accept as "ready to go" in further casting processes.  A sub 10 micron or less, build thickness should be our goal..

    I believe the problem is we are all thinking to big a volume in the print envelope. Small is beautiful they say.  The biggest machine I have seen has a print area of 4m X 2m X 2m and a 300 micron build layer, not typical of most peoples demands. (Skyfall had printed a 2/3 scale Aston Martin)

    The goal for experimental solid printers, in my opinion, should be ultra fine surface resolution and a small build volume and the use of smart software that can modulated the thickness of the final printed layers of high radius of curvature. 
    I believe also that micro positioning and long print times are is perfectly acceptable if it delivers the optimal solution. I believe adaptation of blue laser disk drives has potential, using bottom up building, using the laser to expose the top exposed layer of resin while topping up the resin tank using servo driven actuator. The laser head would move incrementally above the built resin surface. In the limit if the build thickness is very very thin then the surface finish will be okay even allowing for errors in position resolution. 
    With 3D modelling  and solid printing we have the opportunity to do amazing things but we are just not there yet, and the technology we have selected to promote will not liberate the actual solution we all seek.


    On 15 November 2012 17:11, Chris Marion <chrismarion@...> wrote:
     

    Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!

    I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image sequences - afogassa




    --
    Regards

    Francis Leach


  • Graham Stabler
    ... Not mine, I just tried to point out it was a rather closed opinion. It turns out to be a personal opinion based on your usage but it was not expressed as
    Message 2 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
    • 0 Attachment

      On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Francis Leach <francisleach@...> wrote:

      I only expressed an opinion but seem to have touched many a nerve.

      Not mine, I just tried to point out it was a rather closed opinion. It turns out to be a personal opinion based on your usage but it was not expressed as such.

      My personal opinions are only based on the things I have previously read on this forum and the way in which some people assumed the technical high ground in all that they reply to other peoples opinions. Your previous reply to me is a case in point.

      ???? 

      I merely offered my post as a checkpoint, to ensure that we appreciate were we are going and what is an acceptable goal rather than just convincing ourselves that finished solidprinted model with obvious build lines are completely acceptable.

      It is not how it came across

      Is it acceptable to have a solidprinted model that one has to fill the build lines or smooth the surface before it is usable?. Is it acceptable to have a solid-print that is brittle and too fragile?

      The answer is: "it depends" it depends on what you are doing with the models. Of course using the term "too" automatically answers its own question. Some times build lines are acceptable, others not.
       
      If an FDM solution is right for you, brilliant. If a model with build lines is acceptable to you is okay, brilliant. You are right not everyone need surface smoothness and are happy to make the value judgement but they are useless to me and I expressed that as my opinion. 

      Adding the simple "to me" changes the whole meaning. Again I would not even of replied if you had said "current DIY offerings are not good enough for my applications, why don't we work on an industry beating solution" instead we just get "that is not acceptable, that is useless"

      The Envisiontec machines also excellent machines  and equal to the Solidscape machine but printing costs are silly money.

      And they use the DLP technology several people are working on if you really want to see no build lines one option is better mechanics and longer build times, just lower layer thickness and reduce build area to increase resolution, you also maintain high speed printing.
       
      In my opinion, the test of quality for model making purposes is scale fidelity. There is zero point of solidprinting for model making if you can not resolve fine detail on surfaces because the general surface is furrowed with build lines which have to be smoothed away with the potential of obliterating is detail. 

      Of course
       
      Agent Provocateur  ;0)

      Lol

      Email is a blunt instrument, let's not beat each other over the head with it :)  Perhaps you would like to start a new thread about the raster scanning laser approach.

      Graham


       



      On 16 November 2012 00:19, Graham Stabler <grezmos@...> wrote:
       

      "You have a bad attitude"

      Thanks for letting me know .... But best not to get personal

      You are making big assumptions about the uses people wish to put 3d printers to, a zcorp can directly print moulds for the casting of metal parts or parts for investment casting of large parts. Look feel is a useful use of a 3d printer. But that was just an example, apparently if it is of no use to you it is useless.

      I have a commercial FDM printer from dimension but the DLP based printers beat it resolution wise and we have seen some good examples of patterns for jewellery as it happens, I wonder if you have seen them? Check in the photo section, I think the folder is something like "seas 3d printer"

      Michael has already done 20um layers with his B9 creator and there is nothing to stop the layer thickness being reduced further, a chase of optics on the projector could also lead to finer lateral resolution with associated smaller build size.

      Graham


      On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
       

      Yes

      Useless and too fragile to be usable for anything other that "look feel" examples.

      You have a bad attitude 


      On 15 November 2012 23:37, Graham Stabler <grezmos@...> wrote:
       

      Not everyone is interested in jewellery applications and finishes ready for casting and that is not the only industrial context. I can only assume that zcorps powder based printers are failures in your opinion?


      Graham


      On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
       

      Chris


      I have admired your work at every stage and your drive to an effective solid printing system is a to be applauded. I wish to thank you for your amazing contributions and long may you succeed.

      I do not wish to pour rain on some other peoples parties but the optimal solution is yet to be devised. 

      Examples of  "printed solutions" seen from "successful" experimenters would be regarded as total failures in a industrial context. Not a single solution yet seen is commercially acceptable. If we were to believe that we have achieved the goal of parity we are deluding ourselves. In my opinion, none of the current own grown machines are acceptable in terms of build finish.

      What is sought should be is a solution that is equal to or better than that obtainable from the best of commercial source at a price we can afford.

      I use commercial solid printers a lot and the best resolution for small items ( less than 40mm long x 30mm wide ) are only obtainable from Solidscape machines using 2  waxes with differentiated melting points as the printed media.
      Typically these are used in the finest of jewellery applications. The machines are mega expensive and totally beyond the reach of most private modellers. No other commercial machines come any way close to the surface finish that I would accept as "ready to go" in further casting processes.  A sub 10 micron or less, build thickness should be our goal..

      I believe the problem is we are all thinking to big a volume in the print envelope. Small is beautiful they say.  The biggest machine I have seen has a print area of 4m X 2m X 2m and a 300 micron build layer, not typical of most peoples demands. (Skyfall had printed a 2/3 scale Aston Martin)

      The goal for experimental solid printers, in my opinion, should be ultra fine surface resolution and a small build volume and the use of smart software that can modulated the thickness of the final printed layers of high radius of curvature. 
      I believe also that micro positioning and long print times are is perfectly acceptable if it delivers the optimal solution. I believe adaptation of blue laser disk drives has potential, using bottom up building, using the laser to expose the top exposed layer of resin while topping up the resin tank using servo driven actuator. The laser head would move incrementally above the built resin surface. In the limit if the build thickness is very very thin then the surface finish will be okay even allowing for errors in position resolution. 
      With 3D modelling  and solid printing we have the opportunity to do amazing things but we are just not there yet, and the technology we have selected to promote will not liberate the actual solution we all seek.


      On 15 November 2012 17:11, Chris Marion <chrismarion@...> wrote:
       

      Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!

      I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image sequences - afogassa




      --
      Regards

      Francis Leach



    • Francis
      I come from Yorkshire where a spade is a shovel and our plain speaking is a curse. I did not intend to offend but the tone of the replies made in the past by
      Message 3 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        I come from Yorkshire where a spade is a shovel and our plain speaking is a curse. I did not intend to offend but the tone of the replies made in the past by others offended me.
      • Graham Stabler
        Me too! I hale from the East Riding though now living in Oxford. Might explain a few things :) Graham
        Message 4 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Me too! I hale from the East Riding though now living in Oxford.

          Might explain a few things :)

          Graham


          On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Francis <francisleach@...> wrote:
           

          I come from Yorkshire where a spade is a shovel and our plain speaking is a curse. I did not intend to offend but the tone of the replies made in the past by others offended me.

        • Mahmut Aydin
          Hello Chris , Thank you for your info , i ll be waiting forwaard  :)  Great....  All my best... ________________________________ From: Chris Marion
          Message 5 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello Chris , Thank you for your info , i ll be waiting forwaard  :)  Great.... 

            All my best...



            From: Chris Marion <chrismarion@...>
            To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 6:11 PM
            Subject: Re: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Dlp software

             
            Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!

            I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image sequences - afogassa can you comment further on this?) 

            -Chris

             
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: aslinurdan1812
            Sent: 11/15/12 10:01 AM
            To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Dlp software

             

            Hello , I m new in this group, i like to build one but i dont see any software file, is there anybody can give me link or upload the file for dlp stl software?
             
             


          • cadcamtrav
            Actually 3d Systems has yet to realize that the jewelry industry exists. There was only myself and a couple of other service providers in the US running Vipers
            Message 6 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Actually 3d Systems has yet to realize that the jewelry industry exists. There was only myself and a couple of other service providers in the US running Vipers for jewelry at .001" or lower.

              The products they have released to target jewelry and dental fail in comparison to the DLP machines on the market. I had hoped the CPX line would show promise but the parts are just marginally acceptable for jewelry and we found to require to much benching.

              Their focus is definitely on larger parts, which is fine as thats where the big dollars are at in this industry. Well... actually their focus is on becoming the worlds largest service provider judging by their acquisitions over the past 3 years.

              In every machine i've owned commercially (ET's, SolidScapes, SLA, Thermojet, CNC, Asiga) I have been a guinea pig for some company trying to solve the same puzzles we are.

              I have an Asiga Pico 39 Plus sitting next to me that is brand new that is having some delamination issues. It's all just part of the game whether its commercial or DIY.

              Peter I thought your build quality rivals many commercial devices. Be proud.



              --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "pzamov" <pzamov@...> wrote:
              >
              > @ Group
              >
              > >"Examples of "printed solutions" seen from "successful" >experimenters would be regarded as total failures in a industrial >context. Not a single solution yet seen is commercially acceptable. >If we were to believe that we have achieved the goal of parity we >are deluding ourselves. In my opinion, none of the current own grown >machines are acceptable in terms of build finish.
              >
              > >What is sought should be is a solution that is equal to or better >than that obtainable from the best of commercial source at a price >we can afford."
              >
              > Not a single COMMERCIAL solution seen is commercially acceptable either. ROTFLMAO
              >
              > "Total failure" is always present even for commercial - take a look at what is happening with Asiga and Envisiontec with their "Pico"/"Micro" machines. They have resins but most are not castable consistently. They have small and low price, but they have a problem with the projectors/programming/resin.
              >
              > Envisiontec's own resins are not castable on a 100% - maybe 85%-90% is more like it. Is 85% castable in silver, gold, platinum not a "Total Failure"?? Consider that 1kg of platinum/gold when cast cannot be reused more than 50% old/new metal ratio from there on without a refining process. Imagine having 5 failures in 30 castings = you just wasted money to refine 5kg of platinum/gold. And then it continues when you reuse the gold/platinum you get 10 more failures?? Can you afford to lose money from gold or platinum casting??? What if the 10 bad castings from 50 are all in a row???
              >
              > I already have tested a 10 micron resolution on Z ( using the precision KR2001-0200LP linear ),tried it, but have no need for the long hours. The smallest feature size I have is 0.1 - meaning anything less will be sanded and polished away in the jewelry business. Why would anyone in the jewelry biz need anything smaller considering that the technology of finishing and polishing has not changed in a few hundred years - maybe some need it, most do not. If that kind of resolution and quality was needed Asiga, Envisiontec, Solidscape, 3DS would have thrown an exorbitant amount of money for research in that direction. Even for dental it is not needed. You can get fantastic finish on jewelry rough casting @ 10 micron. Mag tumble it , sand it with 2000 grit and polish. Is that quality craftsmanship and valued jewelry like Cartier?
              >
              >
              > Show Us The Money and it will happen! ;-)
              > We do this for "shits and giggles" out of our own pockets and they are not as deep as 3DS for example, but we still managed to get comparable to 3DS/Envisiontec results.
              >
              > If anyone needs that kind of resolution they shall be willing to pay for it - I have no problem being a part of a commercial entity ( Maybe Google will take me up on it) uniting 20-30+ members from the group from quite the wide spectra of backgrounds and knowledge.
              > As long as there exist a misunderstanding: DIY is that DIY - might be better in every way compared to commercial or it turns commercial very quickly if it is not already.
              >
              > Just my 1/2 Eurocents worth...
              >
              > Cheers!
              > Peter
              > A Professional Amateur...
              > ...or maybe an Amateur Professional!
              >
              >
              > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "cadcamtrav" <travisserio@> wrote:
              > >
              > > I'm in the jewelry industry and agree with you 100%, Graham.
              > >
              > > I don't know who all went to RAPID this year but the full scale Brooks shoes printed in full color on the ZCorps were fantastic!
              > >
              > > As for solidscape machines, i've had several over the years... Unless they are running at their absolute best calibration most are very gritty and the quality is not that great compared to something like a Perfactory XL with ERM lens. That XL with ERM building at 16 micron is absolutely stunning and leaves almost no trace of visible layering and has a fantastic XY resolution for feature detail.
              > >
              > > And as for DIY being better than commercial. Well... that would be great but I dont want to spend 10k on a projector or 30k on a laser + laser subsystem for my home DIY unit. Thus the DIY low cost, budget option. I would love to build a Ferrari out of some Ford Taurus parts, too but it's probably not going to happen.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, Graham Stabler <grezmos@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > "You have a bad attitude"
              > > >
              > > > Thanks for letting me know .... But best not to get personal
              > > >
              > > > You are making big assumptions about the uses people wish to put 3d
              > > > printers to, a zcorp can directly print moulds for the casting of metal
              > > > parts or parts for investment casting of large parts. Look feel is a useful
              > > > use of a 3d printer. But that was just an example, apparently if it is of
              > > > no use to you it is useless.
              > > >
              > > > I have a commercial FDM printer from dimension but the DLP based printers
              > > > beat it resolution wise and we have seen some good examples of patterns for
              > > > jewellery as it happens, I wonder if you have seen them? Check in the photo
              > > > section, I think the folder is something like "seas 3d printer"
              > > >
              > > > Michael has already done 20um layers with his B9 creator and there is
              > > > nothing to stop the layer thickness being reduced further, a chase of
              > > > optics on the projector could also lead to finer lateral resolution with
              > > > associated smaller build size.
              > > >
              > > > Graham
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
              > > >
              > > > > **
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Yes
              > > > > Useless and too fragile to be usable for anything other that "look feel"
              > > > > examples.
              > > > >
              > > > > You have a bad attitude
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > On 15 November 2012 23:37, Graham Stabler <grezmos@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > **
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Not everyone is interested in jewellery applications and finishes ready
              > > > > for casting and that is not the only industrial context. I can only assume
              > > > > that zcorps powder based printers are failures in your opinion?
              > > > >
              > > > > Graham
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > **
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Chris
              > > > >
              > > > > I have admired your work at every stage and your drive to an effective
              > > > > solid printing system is a to be applauded. I wish to thank you for your
              > > > > amazing contributions and long may you succeed.
              > > > >
              > > > > I do not wish to pour rain on some other peoples parties but the optimal
              > > > > solution is yet to be devised.
              > > > >
              > > > > Examples of "printed solutions" seen from "successful" experimenters
              > > > > would be regarded as total failures in a industrial context. Not a single
              > > > > solution yet seen is commercially acceptable. If we were to believe that we
              > > > > have achieved the goal of parity we are deluding ourselves. In my opinion,
              > > > > none of the current own grown machines are acceptable in terms of build
              > > > > finish.
              > > > >
              > > > > What is sought should be is a solution that is equal to or better than
              > > > > that obtainable from the best of commercial source at a price we can afford.
              > > > >
              > > > > I use commercial solid printers a lot and the best resolution for small
              > > > > items ( less than 40mm long x 30mm wide ) are only obtainable from
              > > > > Solidscape machines using 2 waxes with differentiated melting points as
              > > > > the printed media.
              > > > > Typically these are used in the finest of jewellery applications. The
              > > > > machines are mega expensive and totally beyond the reach of most private
              > > > > modellers. No other commercial machines come any way close to the surface
              > > > > finish that I would accept as "ready to go" in further casting processes.
              > > > > A sub 10 micron or less, build thickness should be our goal..
              > > > >
              > > > > I believe the problem is we are all thinking to big a volume in the print
              > > > > envelope. Small is beautiful they say. The biggest machine I have seen has
              > > > > a print area of 4m X 2m X 2m and a 300 micron build layer, not typical of
              > > > > most peoples demands. (Skyfall had printed a 2/3 scale Aston Martin)
              > > > >
              > > > > The goal for experimental solid printers, in my opinion, should be ultra
              > > > > fine surface resolution and a small build volume and the use of smart
              > > > > software that can modulated the thickness of the final printed layers of
              > > > > high radius of curvature.
              > > > > I believe also that micro positioning and long print times are is
              > > > > perfectly acceptable if it delivers the optimal solution. I
              > > > > believe adaptation of blue laser disk drives has potential, using bottom up
              > > > > building, using the laser to expose the top exposed layer of resin while
              > > > > topping up the resin tank using servo driven actuator. The laser head would
              > > > > move incrementally above the built resin surface. In the limit if the build
              > > > > thickness is very very thin then the surface finish will be okay even
              > > > > allowing for errors in position resolution.
              > > > > With 3D modelling and solid printing we have the opportunity to do
              > > > > amazing things but we are just not there yet, and the technology we have
              > > > > selected to promote will not liberate the actual solution we all seek.
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > On 15 November 2012 17:11, Chris Marion <chrismarion@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > **
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!
              > > > >
              > > > > I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (
              > > > > http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL
              > > > > modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print
              > > > > solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that
              > > > > within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary
              > > > > Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people
              > > > > are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this
              > > > > group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I
              > > > > don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image
              > > > > sequences - afogassa
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • pzamov
              Hi Travis, Thanks for letting us learn from the Tsplines Signet Ring ! I watched it in one shot and did not pause for a sec, tho I rewinded a lot when I
              Message 7 of 25 , Nov 16, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Travis,

                Thanks for letting us learn from the Tsplines "Signet Ring"!
                I watched it in one shot and did not pause for a sec, tho I rewinded a lot when I watched it the second time around.

                >Well... actually their focus is on becoming the worlds largest >service provider judging by their acquisitions over the past 3 >years.

                And acquire most of the DIY competition and CAD warehouses.

                > In every machine i've owned commercially (ET's, SolidScapes, SLA,
                > Thermojet, CNC, Asiga) I have been a guinea pig for some company >trying to solve the same puzzles we are.

                I would agree to being a guinea pig ( if anyone is from Guinea please don't be offended ), but only if a corporation agrees to be the guinea pig in the price department.

                > I have an Asiga Pico 39 Plus sitting next to me that is brand new >that is having some delamination issues. It's all just part of the >game whether its commercial or DIY.

                Since it is DIY I can be a guinea pig for myself and play all day long for a lot less money and resins cost. Any resin I pretty much find, I can use.- I'm not limited by RFID crap or only consumables from the original manufacturer.

                > Peter I thought your build quality rivals many commercial devices. >Be proud.
                Thanks to this group it does rival the commercial ones. That was the idea as I don't have 40 grand to spend on a projector + monthly fee of 7 grand and $1500 for a replacement projector bulb.
                Nor do I have 30 grand for a Revo540C ;-) - I got a mini mill and doing some creative fixtures to hold the wax in.

                I am a little (I'm rather modest) proud. It was a labor of love.

                Peter


                > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "pzamov" <pzamov@> wrote:
                > >
                > > @ Group
                > >
                > > >"Examples of "printed solutions" seen from "successful" >experimenters would be regarded as total failures in a industrial >context. Not a single solution yet seen is commercially acceptable. >If we were to believe that we have achieved the goal of parity we >are deluding ourselves. In my opinion, none of the current own grown >machines are acceptable in terms of build finish.
                > >
                > > >What is sought should be is a solution that is equal to or better >than that obtainable from the best of commercial source at a price >we can afford."
                > >
                > > Not a single COMMERCIAL solution seen is commercially acceptable either. ROTFLMAO
                > >
                > > "Total failure" is always present even for commercial - take a look at what is happening with Asiga and Envisiontec with their "Pico"/"Micro" machines. They have resins but most are not castable consistently. They have small and low price, but they have a problem with the projectors/programming/resin.
                > >
                > > Envisiontec's own resins are not castable on a 100% - maybe 85%-90% is more like it. Is 85% castable in silver, gold, platinum not a "Total Failure"?? Consider that 1kg of platinum/gold when cast cannot be reused more than 50% old/new metal ratio from there on without a refining process. Imagine having 5 failures in 30 castings = you just wasted money to refine 5kg of platinum/gold. And then it continues when you reuse the gold/platinum you get 10 more failures?? Can you afford to lose money from gold or platinum casting??? What if the 10 bad castings from 50 are all in a row???
                > >
                > > I already have tested a 10 micron resolution on Z ( using the precision KR2001-0200LP linear ),tried it, but have no need for the long hours. The smallest feature size I have is 0.1 - meaning anything less will be sanded and polished away in the jewelry business. Why would anyone in the jewelry biz need anything smaller considering that the technology of finishing and polishing has not changed in a few hundred years - maybe some need it, most do not. If that kind of resolution and quality was needed Asiga, Envisiontec, Solidscape, 3DS would have thrown an exorbitant amount of money for research in that direction. Even for dental it is not needed. You can get fantastic finish on jewelry rough casting @ 10 micron. Mag tumble it , sand it with 2000 grit and polish. Is that quality craftsmanship and valued jewelry like Cartier?
                > >
                > >
                > > Show Us The Money and it will happen! ;-)
                > > We do this for "shits and giggles" out of our own pockets and they are not as deep as 3DS for example, but we still managed to get comparable to 3DS/Envisiontec results.
                > >
                > > If anyone needs that kind of resolution they shall be willing to pay for it - I have no problem being a part of a commercial entity ( Maybe Google will take me up on it) uniting 20-30+ members from the group from quite the wide spectra of backgrounds and knowledge.
                > > As long as there exist a misunderstanding: DIY is that DIY - might be better in every way compared to commercial or it turns commercial very quickly if it is not already.
                > >
                > > Just my 1/2 Eurocents worth...
                > >
                > > Cheers!
                > > Peter
                > > A Professional Amateur...
                > > ...or maybe an Amateur Professional!
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "cadcamtrav" <travisserio@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > I'm in the jewelry industry and agree with you 100%, Graham.
                > > >
                > > > I don't know who all went to RAPID this year but the full scale Brooks shoes printed in full color on the ZCorps were fantastic!
                > > >
                > > > As for solidscape machines, i've had several over the years... Unless they are running at their absolute best calibration most are very gritty and the quality is not that great compared to something like a Perfactory XL with ERM lens. That XL with ERM building at 16 micron is absolutely stunning and leaves almost no trace of visible layering and has a fantastic XY resolution for feature detail.
                > > >
                > > > And as for DIY being better than commercial. Well... that would be great but I dont want to spend 10k on a projector or 30k on a laser + laser subsystem for my home DIY unit. Thus the DIY low cost, budget option. I would love to build a Ferrari out of some Ford Taurus parts, too but it's probably not going to happen.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, Graham Stabler <grezmos@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > "You have a bad attitude"
                > > > >
                > > > > Thanks for letting me know .... But best not to get personal
                > > > >
                > > > > You are making big assumptions about the uses people wish to put 3d
                > > > > printers to, a zcorp can directly print moulds for the casting of metal
                > > > > parts or parts for investment casting of large parts. Look feel is a useful
                > > > > use of a 3d printer. But that was just an example, apparently if it is of
                > > > > no use to you it is useless.
                > > > >
                > > > > I have a commercial FDM printer from dimension but the DLP based printers
                > > > > beat it resolution wise and we have seen some good examples of patterns for
                > > > > jewellery as it happens, I wonder if you have seen them? Check in the photo
                > > > > section, I think the folder is something like "seas 3d printer"
                > > > >
                > > > > Michael has already done 20um layers with his B9 creator and there is
                > > > > nothing to stop the layer thickness being reduced further, a chase of
                > > > > optics on the projector could also lead to finer lateral resolution with
                > > > > associated smaller build size.
                > > > >
                > > > > Graham
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > > **
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Yes
                > > > > > Useless and too fragile to be usable for anything other that "look feel"
                > > > > > examples.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > You have a bad attitude
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > On 15 November 2012 23:37, Graham Stabler <grezmos@> wrote:
                > > > > >
                > > > > > **
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Not everyone is interested in jewellery applications and finishes ready
                > > > > > for casting and that is not the only industrial context. I can only assume
                > > > > > that zcorps powder based printers are failures in your opinion?
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Graham
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012, Francis Leach wrote:
                > > > > >
                > > > > > **
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Chris
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I have admired your work at every stage and your drive to an effective
                > > > > > solid printing system is a to be applauded. I wish to thank you for your
                > > > > > amazing contributions and long may you succeed.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I do not wish to pour rain on some other peoples parties but the optimal
                > > > > > solution is yet to be devised.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Examples of "printed solutions" seen from "successful" experimenters
                > > > > > would be regarded as total failures in a industrial context. Not a single
                > > > > > solution yet seen is commercially acceptable. If we were to believe that we
                > > > > > have achieved the goal of parity we are deluding ourselves. In my opinion,
                > > > > > none of the current own grown machines are acceptable in terms of build
                > > > > > finish.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > What is sought should be is a solution that is equal to or better than
                > > > > > that obtainable from the best of commercial source at a price we can afford.
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I use commercial solid printers a lot and the best resolution for small
                > > > > > items ( less than 40mm long x 30mm wide ) are only obtainable from
                > > > > > Solidscape machines using 2 waxes with differentiated melting points as
                > > > > > the printed media.
                > > > > > Typically these are used in the finest of jewellery applications. The
                > > > > > machines are mega expensive and totally beyond the reach of most private
                > > > > > modellers. No other commercial machines come any way close to the surface
                > > > > > finish that I would accept as "ready to go" in further casting processes.
                > > > > > A sub 10 micron or less, build thickness should be our goal..
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I believe the problem is we are all thinking to big a volume in the print
                > > > > > envelope. Small is beautiful they say. The biggest machine I have seen has
                > > > > > a print area of 4m X 2m X 2m and a 300 micron build layer, not typical of
                > > > > > most peoples demands. (Skyfall had printed a 2/3 scale Aston Martin)
                > > > > >
                > > > > > The goal for experimental solid printers, in my opinion, should be ultra
                > > > > > fine surface resolution and a small build volume and the use of smart
                > > > > > software that can modulated the thickness of the final printed layers of
                > > > > > high radius of curvature.
                > > > > > I believe also that micro positioning and long print times are is
                > > > > > perfectly acceptable if it delivers the optimal solution. I
                > > > > > believe adaptation of blue laser disk drives has potential, using bottom up
                > > > > > building, using the laser to expose the top exposed layer of resin while
                > > > > > topping up the resin tank using servo driven actuator. The laser head would
                > > > > > move incrementally above the built resin surface. In the limit if the build
                > > > > > thickness is very very thin then the surface finish will be okay even
                > > > > > allowing for errors in position resolution.
                > > > > > With 3D modelling and solid printing we have the opportunity to do
                > > > > > amazing things but we are just not there yet, and the technology we have
                > > > > > selected to promote will not liberate the actual solution we all seek.
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > On 15 November 2012 17:11, Chris Marion <chrismarion@> wrote:
                > > > > >
                > > > > > **
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!
                > > > > >
                > > > > > I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (
                > > > > > http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL
                > > > > > modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print
                > > > > > solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that
                > > > > > within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary
                > > > > > Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people
                > > > > > are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this
                > > > > > group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I
                > > > > > don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image
                > > > > > sequences - afogassa
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • cygnusgil
                How did you measure the difference?
                Message 8 of 25 , Nov 17, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  How did you measure the difference?

                  --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "afogassa" <afogassa@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > yes, there is no free software or low budget that will do everything(generate support,slice,and controll the printer(DLP).
                  > i came up with a slideshow software that controll the exposing and blanking time in adition it loads a grayscale mask to equalize the light on the projector to be more uniform across the projection plataform it´s very important to have a eaven light intensity to avoid warping on cured parts. my projector had a difference of 0.02 amps across the surface and by my calculations it equal to 2 sec expossure time from one side to the other of the build plataform.
                  > it also sends a signal tru serial port that can be detected by a microcontroller to run some sort of controller, so its very customized as almost any microcontroller can do the motion on the hardware side.
                  > I thought that this was key holding people out from building theyr own but i guess not,got no feedback what so ever.anyway it works for me so i´m fine with it.
                  > For slicing i´m using Paulos kick ass slicer,then load the bmps and drink lots of coffe till i get the parts out.
                  > I manage to put the software together form bits and bytes from other codes,not easy since i´m not a programmer but i end up with what i wanted after lossing half of my hair :-) and spending about 2 kilos of resin on the process.
                  > So, none of the software that i ´ve tried works without a glich, that´s why i went my way.
                  > The last time i did try Chris software(thank´s for your efforts) it was not filling the slices as it should so i gave up on waiting and went my way.
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Marion" <chrismarion@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!
                  > >
                  > > I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image sequences - afogassa can you comment further on this?)
                  > >
                  > > -Chris
                  > >
                  > > ----- Original Message -----
                  > > From: aslinurdan1812
                  > > Sent: 11/15/12 10:01 AM
                  > > To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Subject: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Dlp software
                  > >
                  > > Hello , I m new in this group, i like to build one but i dont see any software file, is there anybody can give me link or upload the file for dlp stl software?
                  > >
                  >
                • afogassa
                  a photodiode and a multimeter on a Mv scale. it´s milivolts not mamps as i typed before.
                  Message 9 of 25 , Nov 17, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    a photodiode and a multimeter on a Mv scale. it´s milivolts not mamps as i typed before.

                    --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "cygnusgil" <cygnusgil@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > How did you measure the difference?
                    >
                    > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "afogassa" <afogassa@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > yes, there is no free software or low budget that will do everything(generate support,slice,and controll the printer(DLP).
                    > > i came up with a slideshow software that controll the exposing and blanking time in adition it loads a grayscale mask to equalize the light on the projector to be more uniform across the projection plataform it´s very important to have a eaven light intensity to avoid warping on cured parts. my projector had a difference of 0.02 amps across the surface and by my calculations it equal to 2 sec expossure time from one side to the other of the build plataform.
                    > > it also sends a signal tru serial port that can be detected by a microcontroller to run some sort of controller, so its very customized as almost any microcontroller can do the motion on the hardware side.
                    > > I thought that this was key holding people out from building theyr own but i guess not,got no feedback what so ever.anyway it works for me so i´m fine with it.
                    > > For slicing i´m using Paulos kick ass slicer,then load the bmps and drink lots of coffe till i get the parts out.
                    > > I manage to put the software together form bits and bytes from other codes,not easy since i´m not a programmer but i end up with what i wanted after lossing half of my hair :-) and spending about 2 kilos of resin on the process.
                    > > So, none of the software that i ´ve tried works without a glich, that´s why i went my way.
                    > > The last time i did try Chris software(thank´s for your efforts) it was not filling the slices as it should so i gave up on waiting and went my way.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Marion" <chrismarion@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Hello aslinurdan1812, and welcome to the group!
                    > > >
                    > > > I am currently developing a new update for the 3DLP Host Software (http://code.google.com/p/3dlp-host-software/) that brings in 3D STL modeling and slicing features. My software is an all-in-one slice&print solution, but it's currently in a buggy Alpha stage (I hope to fix that within the next few weeks). As far as other software packages go, Gary Hodgson has developed a modified version of Pronterface that many people are using to successfully drive their printers. Another member of this group, afogassa, is also currently developing a DLP printing software (I don't think the software does slicing, but instead takes pre-sliced image sequences - afogassa can you comment further on this?)
                    > > >
                    > > > -Chris
                    > > >
                    > > > ----- Original Message -----
                    > > > From: aslinurdan1812
                    > > > Sent: 11/15/12 10:01 AM
                    > > > To: diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: [diy_3d_printing_and_fabrication] Dlp software
                    > > >
                    > > > Hello , I m new in this group, i like to build one but i dont see any software file, is there anybody can give me link or upload the file for dlp stl software?
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.