# 3D Printing > General 3D Printing Discussion >  Cartesian vs delta vs corexy

## Sebastian Finke

Has there ever been a proper comparison conducted between Cartesian, delta and corexy printers. Preferably a proper lab test that pits the three against one another and precisely note the outcomes in various criteria eg. speed, accuracy, electricity consumption, rigidity/structural integrity, maintenance ease, diy, etc? If not then its about time...

----------


## Davo

It's about time someone precisely noted the outcomes among not only different types of printers, but also among different brands of the same type of printer.

----------


## Mjolinor

Buy me one of each and I will be happy to oblige.  :Smile:

----------


## iDig3Dprinting

> Buy me one of each and I will be happy to oblige.


That would only be a sample size of 1 so would not produce statistically testable results. 

It is a good idea though. Whether you would be able to distinguish between the different platforms is another matter as this is more than likely going to be swamped by between model variance in precision. You could however test between different models, on the assumption that they where all calibrated as best they could be.

There is a team attempting to do this with 3D printer filament, here is a link to a post the put on our community on google+ where they discuss what they want to do and how they are going to try and do it (there is some discussion in the comments).

----------


## curious aardvark

what's corexy ?

----------


## iDig3Dprinting

> what's corexy ?


Corexy is the slightly different arrangement of belts. All the above use Cartesian coordinates but I believe that you can get 3D printers that use polar coordinates.

----------


## curious aardvark

so like the model-t then ?

----------


## DBFIU

COREXY is so not intuitive. I know practically nothing about it, but when I was reading about this design a couple months back I started to get anxiety, then I stopped the reading. I just don't see what the purposes is other then academics, there is, to designing a printer with this type of configuration. I think it uses one less motor, but how much does a NEMA 17 motor cost these days? 15 bucks?

Someone please stop the insanity.

Cartesian, delta, corexy, oh my!!!

----------


## richardphat

Cartesian for no brainer, and delta requires freaking pain in the butt to calibrate on large print surface. You screwed up, you are pretty sure that large parts instant warp even on PLA.

----------


## Sebastian Finke

Personally I'm not convinced by delta printer. They seem incredibly fragile. And having the nozzle at the ends of those long arms seem a recipe for disaster. My opinion. They're certainly fun to watch though.

CoreXY... well they're not exactly taking the world by storm so I guess there must some drawbacks. I heard that they are more precise. But that's anecdotal, I would really like to see a more scientific approach to these tests.

Cartesian is everywhere. Whether its cost, ease of maintenance, whatever... there is probably a bunch of reasons why its still the go-to variant.

----------


## richardphat

They are robust in general, cheap delta built with thin arms are fragile. You need 3 good tower axis and you're ready to roll.
It's like having a cartesian printer with poor frame that leads to vibration and other annoying thing.

----------


## Sebastian Finke

> They are robust in general, cheap delta built with thin arms are fragile. You need 3 good tower axis and you're ready to roll.
> It's like having a cartesian printer with poor frame that leads to vibration and other annoying thing.


I'd feel more secure if the the delta's guide rods _weren't_ part of the load bearing structure i.e. have a sturdy latticed metal frame that hole the guide rods. Way more stable...

----------


## Mjolinor

CoreXY and bowden extruders are as fast as you can get because there is very little weight in the hot end. 

That lack of weight alone makes it worthwhile if you need to print fast.

----------


## bbinnard

I have a delta-style printer and it is excellent. Unfortunately my printer is not yet available in the US - I got mine because I joined an early adopter program. Here is the web page for my printer: http://www.atom3dp.com/en/atom2/#top

Delta's have some distinct advantages over Cartesian designs: (1) generally faster printing because they typically have lighter printheads (less moving mass); (2) larger print volume, particularly in the vertical dimension, (3) simpler control electronics becuase there are only 4 limit switches, (4) require less desk space, and (5) they are incredibly cool to watch while printing.

I agree that many delta printer designs are insufficiently robust, which is why I chose the Atom2.  It is very well constructed and quite sturdy. The Atom2 also does truly automatic bed leveling which I think any printer should do. 

It is true that a delta printer's firmware is more complex than that of a Cartesian design; with a delta there really are no X, Y, and Z dimensions - even though that's what they are called. The printer firmware makes all the necessary calculations to generate proper 3D moves for the printhead, and I have never had a single problem with this.

----------


## richardphat

> I'd feel more secure if the the delta's guide rods _weren't_ part of the load bearing structure i.e. have a sturdy latticed metal frame that hole the guide rods. Way more stable...


That is because of the designs and price resulting. No one will ever stop you from wanting to add extra arms as structure.
It's just they want to sell a cheap product.

http://thingiverse-production-new.s3...w_featured.jpg

----------

