3D Printer any good

[T i m]

<snip>

I just tried it (turns out I had already created an account but it wouldn't run on FF here but seemed to run on Chrome (webgl or summat)) but where are the tools to allow you to rotate the view (for example)? On Sketchup and Repetior you can just rotate the whole scene by grabbing it and pulling it about. It must be possible on TinkerCad?

Secondly, is there a downloadable version as I'm not sure I like doing that sort of thing online (same applies to Sketchup but there is a downloadable version with that).

It's funny how different UI's seem to work / gel with different people. I found Sketchup and the Arduino IDE fairly intuitive from the off (albeit that I still can't remember / do some more complex stuff) whereas the interface that comes with the bbc micro:bit I found completely confusing (when I'm guessing it must be easy as it's designed for kids / schools)?

Similar with IOS versus Windows / Android / Linux (at the GUI). Most things seem logical in the latter 3 but completely backwards in IOS.

Other people appreciate such the other way round of course (and my point). ;-)

Talking of UI's. Daughter sent me some pictures she wanted printed to my phone and I was tasked with going into a local photo printing shop and printing them off for her. I had never seen the machine before but was pleased that I was able to, connect to it via bluetooth, transfer the required photos, select and resize each photo and then even go back and change the quantities as you got the second batch half price. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

<snip>

Yes, I know, I do it but it's not hollow then is it? eg, print a ball with supports, how do you get the support material out of the middle?

Assuming your free plastic infill etc?

How are you costing the 3D printing though? If a kg of PLA is 15 quid and the part you make worth thousands (in say a prototype), how relevant is it if it's 50 or 100% solid (given the size of the objects we are talking about with these printers etc)?

So you don't know that then? ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[newshound]

This is why there are often several different ways to do the same thing in modern operating systems and software. Even if I do sometimes find myself powering up a tablet in order to google how to do something on the MacBook.

One of my big hates in specialist software is when the designer has decided to start from scratch and build a logical, consistent system that (naturally) makes complete sense to them, while being impenetrable to users until they have climbed a steep learning curve.

Good to hear. In the dim and distant past when I was writing code for processing scientific data (with a front end of text and number based dialogue) I reckoned I spent half the total time writing code to trap all the possible user errors and making sure where possible that it was easy to go back.

[T i m]

<snip>

Yeahbut, given there are 'several different ways', shouldn't you be able to find one of them easily?

Agreed. It makes sense to maintain the same 'Look n feel' of something (an app), especially if it's reliant on something else (an OS).

I was pleased, both with myself for 'getting' what they had offered and them for writing something that was intuitive enough to use first time. ;-)

That's not to say that every smartphone user would be able to enable bluetooth, search for the right name and enter the pairing code provided ... but if you can do those things, this UI made it easy / intuitive.

And it's the same with designing hardware. It may be easy to design a cabinet hinge to open 90 Degrees but what if someone tries to open it further [1]? Making things work can be easy, making it work and be tw*t proof is another. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[1] A mate has some what I imagine to be very expensive / hand made hifi and low units that have hinges on that only open 90 Deg. So if I'm trying to fix some kit for him I end up taking the doors off for fear of accidentally pushing one open further and damaging it. If 180 Degree hinges had been fitted from the off that could easily be avoided.

[invalid]

I use fusion 360. It has a steeper learning curve but it very powerful.

Its normally a couple of thousand pounds a year but its free to individuals.

You can store stuff online or local.

[Another Dave]

I run it on Firefox, it works fine. To rotate the view right mouse or ctrl and left mouse grabs the workplane. Shift and right mouse moves it up and down or left and right. Middle button zooms.

No downloadable version unfortunately. I couldn't get on with Sketchup - to each his own.

Another Dave

[Another Dave]

I do quite a lot of printing. 1 kg lasts me 6 months and costs £13 including postage. Using 20% infill means it goes a long way and I very rarely feel the need to up it to 30%.

Another Dave

[Martin Brown]

Fairly steep learning curve territory unless you can find a design that is close to what you want online and just print it. Various makerspace hack space groups and some public libraries have 3D printers (and laser cutters).

3mm PVC foam plastic perhaps? Easier to work with than plywood.

[T i m]

Given that's probably fairly unlikely for a draw divider, I think as long as you have the overall picture of the workflow in hand (not in itself trivial from an outsiders POV granted) the actual steps for something that simple are actually pretty simple.

And given the OP has no experience of 3D printers, is unlikely to be building a printer from scratch and so should get something that could print out-of-the-box.

When we built ours we had no experience of much outside of Arduinos and with little in the way of a manual, had to work it out for ourselves. Had we had someone who was experiences helping us along, I'm sure it would have taken far less experimenting, not that it took that much considering.

The first test print, a 20mm cube, was that, +- a couple of .01 mm ;-)

I'd say with a couple of starter tips on Sketchup (like the button to bring the object into view and full screen) and a quick overview of the very basic tools, a 'design' could be completed in 5 mins and could be being printed another 5 after that, given all the tools installed and a machine ready to go.

And this is coming from someone who isn't a coder, isn't a designer and who hadn't used any form of CAD machine before. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[tabbypurr]

you don't. Surely you know that.

that isn't a sentence that makes sense

??

the point of printing shells & filling is that it uses less than 10% of the material. An order of magnitude less cost opens up more applications.

have you only just realised that?

NT

[tabbypurr]

One feature I'm still waiting for is for printers to sense an object on the bed & print around it. Thus all sorts of things could be placed as infill to cut cost & increase strength, or for various other reasons eg incorporating fixings, a window, a functional item etc.

NT

[T i m]

Then you have a different interpretation of the word 'hollow' than I.

<sigh> "Assuming the plastic you are using for the infill is free".

Eh? Uses less than 10% of the 3D printed material. To fill a hollow object still takes 100% of the infill material?

No, I've know it for some time now. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[tabbypurr]

apparently

It's not an assumption, it's what was stipulated when I brought it up.

Yes, but it's free. It's also a lot more durable than PLA.

Obviously not, as this question was only brought up a day or 2 ago. If you have a problem with me asking questions, honestly I don't care.

NT

[T i m]

<snip>

I was just trying to better understand what you thought might be a solution (it happens that there quite possibly be no need in the OP's scenario but ..). It wasn't your question I was questioning, it was you and your direction. ;-)

No, I have no issue with you asking questions, it's making suggestions that don't to have any practical need or tangibility that confuses me.

What if these draw dividers were for small component draws ... and even if they weren't, for any (d-i-y 3D printable) divider is hardly likely to consider the one roll of PLA you might need to print 100 dividers "steeply expensive", especially as yet we have to find out the total cost of using 'recycled plastic' for any infill?

Cheers, T i m

[tabbypurr]

Print things as hollow as is workable, fill with molten plastic from the kitchen bin. Result: stronger, tougher, much cheaper.

Cost & durability issues are AIUI some of the prime issues with 3d printing.

I had rather more uses for this in mind than just printing drawer dividers :)

The cost of the plastic in the bin is nothing. The cost of the electricity to heat the oven is a few pence if you're not cooking any time vaguely soon.

The question is simply is there a combination of plastics this would be workable with? PLA & HDPE are too close in melting point, PET melts much lower but I've no experience working with it.

NT

[T i m]

Define 'much', considering the cost of any process required to get said material in any workable state and your time etc?

FWIW, I've just printed a whole batch of things at 100% in PLA and didn't consider the material cost for one second.

Fair enough.

Ok ... but not including the damage to your lungs and the cost of your time / redecoration after the fire. ;-)

Ok.

I wonder if anyone else has considered this solution and come up with an answer? If not, why not ... ?

Cheers, T i m

[whisky-dave]

They have it's called a higher end 3D printer, which uses more heads, we have an 8 head printer here cost about £80k IIRC. You can use 'plasic' as suporting material which is then washed away using water. Each head can have it's own colour or type of plastic and can be heated to it's own set temerature. In the marerials department they hae a 1/2 million quid printer that uses lasers too, not that I've seen it just heard about it. It can take other materials too.

[tabbypurr]

processing is fairly trivial.

great. That of course adds nothing to the point

why would you set fire to it? Why would you use a plastic with a fume problem? Do you know anything at all about plastic processing?

It should be fairly obvious they have.

NT

[tabbypurr]

That has its uses but is obviously a substantially different process.

NT