Results 1 to 2 of 2
Threaded View
-
04-30-2017, 01:00 PM #2
in what universe is a machine costing over $100,000 ever going to produce low cost parts ?
At the end of the day it's just another multi jet printer.
Lets really look at this:Based on internal testing and simulation, HP Jet Fusion 3D printing solution average printing time is up to 10x faster than average printing time of comparable FDM & SLS printer solutions from $100,000 USD to $300,000 USD on market
costing:Based on internal testing and public data, HP Jet Fusion 3D printing solution average printing cost-per-part is half the average cost of comparable FDM & SLS printer solutions from $100,000 USD to $300,000 USD on market as of April 2016. Cost analysis based on: standard solution configuration price, supplies price, and maintenance costs recommended by manufacturer. Cost criteria: printing 1-2 build chambers per day/ 5 days per week over 1 year of 30-gram parts at 10% packing density using HP 3D High Reusability PA 12 material, and the powder reusability ratio recommended by manufacturer.
ie: at no point have their statements included existing printers with a similiar printing technology, of which there are quite a number these days.
And any time a company is scared to compare their machine to the ACTUAL competition, you know it costs more to run and is probably no faster.
It has no clever powder handling - post processing requires a machine bigger than the actual printer.
There really isn't anything either groundbreaking or industry leading in this machine. Which is a shame.
If hp had instead aimed for the home/desktop market they could have really done something innovative.
This is just copying existing machines.
What's needed, if hp are serious about having any bragging rights, is a head to head print-off between a hp jet fusion machine and a say an objet connex 500 - the actual competition.Last edited by curious aardvark; 04-30-2017 at 01:06 PM.
New to 3d printing looking for...
05-20-2024, 12:56 AM in Tips, Tricks and Tech Help