Printable View
They have reached the v1.0 stage, so now it's just a matter of getting the manufacture of the final units done and shipped out. Hopefully they'll be able to clear out the backlog of shippments this year!Quote:
Originally Posted by TruePrints3D
(I think we all are looking forward to getting our's!)
I like the bobbing displacer idea best. A negative buoyancy mass located in a corner or at the side of the build tank could be supported by a linkage to an eccentric on a small motor shaft. The eccentric offset would be very small, and the motor would make one revolution at the end of each print layer, then be still during the next print layer. Is there access to the control signals on the peachy board which signal the end of a print layer, or is there a flag in the software? Keeping the rotation speed slow enough to prevent waves might be a challenge, if using a simple dc motor (like the vibrator motor from a cell phone). Maybe it could be controlled with a digital circuit using PWM (pulse width modulation). If the weight were sufficient to return the eccentric to the bottom when power is off, no feedback for motor position would be required. The motor controller would drive it to approximately 270 degrees, and gravity would complete the rev. DDS
Here is my suggestion:
What will we all need once we have the Peachy 3D printer? Resin, resin, resin. Means, lots of shipping. And liquid resin is heavy. Means: it is going to be be very expensive, inside the country, and even more outside the country. High costs are always a limit to the repeated sales of new resin and even of the printer self.
Here is my suggestion
Try producing the resin as powder. That makes it light-weight, lowers the shipping costs significantly, and at the location of the buyer (s)he can purchase locally the liquid chemical that produces liquid resin from the powder. Besides the significantly reduced shipping costs, less protection is needed to avoid the bottle to burst open and spill the precious contents all over, minimum cleaning problems since this cannot happen anymore,, and less cautious measurements since there is no liquid involved anymore during shipping. This is my suggestion.
but you'll still need whatever it is that turns it into a liquid. And unless they can make it water based, then you'll still need to have a bottle of chemical shipped.
Why? If that liquid chemical that can be found at local stores as I said, why then to ship it instead? ;-)
Of course, it depends on how such a powder is made. Means, what liquid chemical is needed to make that powder to liquid resin. But most places have shops that sell chemicals. And I consider a cheap bus drive as financially the better solution that to ship for big money something that might be available in the stores around me. The idea behind is, to reduce the expensive shipping to what we canNOT find in the stores around us.
Think about international shipping, too - the difference in shipping costs might be remarkable.
First off,
You should know that now I have joined this blog, that it will now become very uncool and corporatized. As it seams about the time I learn about these resources, that somehow it appears to be the time they start breaking down. Therefore I am not cool. I have now jinxed you....hopefully not.
Okay,
My concern with this is the effect of moisture on resins in this system. This is a brilliant design for the enthusiast and hopefully those struggling with practical applications. Right now I see this most potential with it being used as a casting die. Being I don't see 5 axis fused filament 3d printers coming to market in order to print the quality for a small scale production, the casting direction is probably where it will be for the struggling inventors. So with effects on moisture this is probably no concern.
Regardless, my proposed solution is possibly a two fold or combination of ideas that could be used individually or apart. The first being the most simple solution is does it have to be a saline solution? Is it possible to find similar solutions that are friendlier to resins with similar buoyancy? The combo idea here is a solid third buoyancy layer. A solid layer that remains partitioned between the buoyancies would possible solve this and additionally, a few other problems. The idea that a solution that is friendlier to resins wouldn't have to be so precise in its buoyancy. A partitioned solid layer would provide greater differentials in buoyancy, allowing for more tolerances. in conjunction with this idea, providing a solid print platform solves many problems. Greater offset tolerances for objects that are not balanced in buoyancy relative to mass. Also allows for stability within any turbulence issues outside normal parameters. Possibly even a few more issues solved. Perhaps a floating build plate that has a great refract index for perfecting the focus of beams. Yes, the 3d printing industry is lucky I am too busy focused on my other ideas.
The greatest rocket scientist that ever lived,
-Robert
I'm wondering how many additives could be added and how thin it could be diluted as a binder with additives. In my dealings with learning about ceramics I discovered that various materials strengthened the end product after diluting. I know the same thing is also done in the plastics industry. Everything from graphite to fiber glass. One advantage here with the liquid bed is not having to worry about clogs with these materials. The limits being the viscosity of the material to allow for proper layering. This is a magical world right now with many unexplored realms and possibilities. I am sure the sellers of these resins don't want you to know these kinds of things. Who will discover the best dilution ratios. Who will discover UV activated caking material that can later be hardened with various other processes. Materials as strong as some found in labs today. Today Yoda figures, tomorrow planet MARS
Hey Robert Goddard,
I think you haven't understood the goal of the Peachy team correctly.
To answer your questions:
No, it doesn't have to be a saline solution, but this is the cheapest way and according to the team they haven't yet had any problems with the resin interacting with that.
A solid layer between the fluids doesn't make any sense as the prints have to pass through that area so... how do you imagine it?
How would you want to have a floating build plate?
I cannot think of a reasonable way to have a layer focusing beams from an optical point of view.
The printed parts have almost no weight in water and so very little support structure is needed to keep them in place while printing.
Compared to other cosumer-grade techniques this is awesome and I don't understand how you want to improve in that (they are already using a solid build platform?)
The second post has nothing to do with the Peachy Printer.
Greetings,
quertz
Thank you for your reply. I am not sure I understand how you think I do not understand? Please fill me in on the goals I am missing? Not sure anything I said has any conflict with the goal. I refuse to see 4 doors.
I understand what they are telling you. From my experience I know a lot of plastics have issues with moisture. Salt and moisture are also generally considered a harsh corrosion environment. Throw in UV and I may be missing something here.
I think you misunderstood my point about a solid layer in between the layers. The idea is that you have a buoyancy layer that is solid. I mentioned several ideas on the direction you could go with it. I believe the idea of this thread is for ideas. Perhaps I also misunderstand the design concept. The part is free floating in a layer of water without any stability? I also disagree with you on the second post. Perhaps peachy printer may not be able to profit from it. If they are true to form, then I can see how it would be beneficial to the community as a whole. Unless you want to remain forever entrenched in the bondage of dependency. Then again, Zeni Kinetic burned me out of $1,400. It wouldn't surprise me how deep the roots of misinformation go in this industry.
Not sure what 4 doors you are refusing to see, but I think your basic understanding of how a print is formed may be wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goddard
Yep, you are missing something. Yes, saline solutions are considered quite harsh for exposed mechanisms. However the saline is not being exposed to the mechanisms here. The resin floats on top of it and it is only touching at an interface layer at the bottom of a pool of resin. The resins being used are a UV curing epoxy(generally) that exhibits minimal water absorption. Most of the time, the water issue with FDM plastic extruders comes into play when they are heated. This design uses no heat. The uv is a collimated laser spot, not a widebeam of UV light.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goddard
Nope, you got it all wrong here. The print begins with a pool of resin on a stable base(the wire mesh or a layer of aquarium rock, etc) that hold the print in place. as the Z height increases, the saline is pumped(dripped) UNDER the liquid resin to raise it up. There is no solid layer being raised. the resin being used is just slightly less dense than the saline solution, so it floats on top, allowing the laser to hit the resin and cure a solid area, then the saline raises a bit and liquid resin flows over the edge and creates a new liquid layer ready for curing. The saline acts as both a Z layer mechanism and as a support mechanism for overhangs and such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goddard
Sorry you got burned by another "company" that used Kickstarter style methods to defraud you. That is one of the hazards of such a system. That is also the reason why I think Peachy is legit. They are trying to make a system that doesn't cost two arms and a left testicle. If they were only trying to defraud you, they would be aiming for a bigger payday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goddard