# Specific 3D Printers, Scanners, & Hardware > Peachy Printer Forum >  Any prints from the Beta team?

## Spelljammer

It has been a little while and an unboxing video was posted on April 2nd. I'm sure someone has printed something in the last few weeks. I would love to see some pics.

----------


## DrLuigi

Ye. I kinda hoped on some more prints from the developers thereselfs, Like a small update with 5 pictures of products they could achieve with the printer,

Thats kinda one the things why i didnt back them up, There is lack of prints that can tell use that its a great new printer or something that is almost the same as FDM,

Also i didnt want a second printer at the time :P don't have any room for it! but i might if the PRO version is a step upwards ^^


Edit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TZMLl6zLyY
This guy should get his one printing when he gets the resin, Wich is soon hopefuly.


Kinda wondering when they will be selling em.

----------


## Anuvin

Yup, that is me. I got my resin yesterday, and I did the calibration print, which took a few stabs to get working, but did work. I then tried a d20, but it got stretched out in a funny way. Going to try again and I will report back with results, good or bad, tonight or tomorrow morning.

----------


## Feign

Stretched, squashed, skewed or wavy, we want to see pics, man.  Especially if it's any of the above "in a funny way"  :Stick Out Tongue: 

Actually, there's a "Print fails" thread in the Gallery, if you put it in there I'm sure it won't look too bad compared to the other stuff.

----------


## nka

Resine was shipped a little after. First part of beta was to build the Peachy and improve it. Now, we will begin to work on print. We will have more videos to show!  :Smile: 

Anuvin first backer print :




> Click for big, obviously.


As reference, it should look like this :



Need a little more tuning/calibration!  :Smile:

----------


## Anuvin

There is the only print I have worth sharing. I had a calibration print that wasn't too good, and I was going to show it, but it fell off my desk. It was then consumed by the carpet and cannot be retrieved with current human technology.

And now, I scratched my laser lens (no one to blame but myself...) so I have to wait until the end of the week to print again! Sorry to those who wanted more updates, we will have to be satisfied with my pictures in the post above.

----------


## Feign

Well, to look on the bright side, even with it distorted and streched, you can still make out the numbers on the sides and you didn't end up with half a pound of wasted resin.

From the pictures, the ripples look bad, until you realize that the dice is so small that the ripples are on the same scale as the fibers in the paper towel it's sitting on.  On a FFF printer that dice would be about 10 layers tall at most.

I guess it takes a week to ship the replacement lens?

----------


## Anuvin

Actually, what you are seeing there is some holes, not numbers. I deleted the numbers from my model. On the upside, the biggest hole is supposed to be there. I wanted a drain hole. The downside is that there are a few other holes, but I now know my laser was really out of focus, and my print speed was such that I am not surprised about the holes. 

The ripples are fairly bad, but really, I just got it printing. And like you said, it's still comparable or better than a properly calibrated FFF.  It shouldn't even print at all, given how badly I calibrated it. 

Lens will be here by Saturday, so I hope to update this thread with lots of pictures come Sunday or Monday.

----------


## DrLuigi

> Actually, what you are seeing there is some holes, not numbers. I deleted the numbers from my model. On the upside, the biggest hole is supposed to be there. I wanted a drain hole. The downside is that there are a few other holes, but I now know my laser was really out of focus, and my print speed was such that I am not surprised about the holes. 
> 
> The ripples are fairly bad, but really, I just got it printing. And like you said, it's still comparable or better than a properly calibrated FFF.  It shouldn't even print at all, given how badly I calibrated it. 
> 
> Lens will be here by Saturday, so I hope to update this thread with lots of pictures come Sunday or Monday.


Goodluck on it, I am very curious what you will be able to get out of this printer as there are almost no photos of prints made with the peachy.

----------


## Pete

> And like you said, it's still comparable or better than a properly calibrated FFF.


What's the total dimensions of this supposed to be, is it the XY that's attenuated or the Z that's stretched?...if you message me the STL then I'll print it on an FFF to show the mess it makes!

----------


## Anuvin

Haha, awesome Pete. Turns out you can host .stl's here on the forum. Thanks Eddie!

This d20 would be right at home on the gaming table at 20~ mm, but I was attempting to print one at 10mm. Based on that, it would seem that it is both: z is twice what it should be, and the XY is a few mm shy too.

----------


## Pete

Well Anuvin, looks like FFF isn't down and out yet! 
I had problems processing this model (I think the walls are so thin and  come so close together that the build gets confused when it overlaps  itself?) I got around this but couldn't print with support material so  the only attachment to the base was one filament at the bottom...but  still quite impressive, here are the print outs in 10mm and 20mm both  straight off the printer and after pulling off all the extra bits by  hand only.

IMG_20140417_163353.jpgIMG_20140417_163506.jpgIMG_20140417_170510.jpgIMG_20140417_170701.jpgIMG_20140417_170713.jpg

----------


## Anuvin

Wow! Those are great! I am surprised how good those look. You must have a well calibrated machine.

Thank you for printing those, Pete. It will be awesome to have some comparison shots as I get the Peachy dialed in. I will consider a comparable print on the Peachy to be a success. Thanks for setting the bar, now I can stare at it until my lens arrives.

Looks like I will be back in business by Friday, I will see if I can get some pictures up Friday night or Saturday.

----------


## nka

Sure thing, once it's working, Peachy version will look better and glossy  :Big Grin:

----------


## Pete

They're OK....I've had more impressive prints, at the moment I seem to have software issues from installing multiple versions and fiddling myself so when I print small objects like this I get a lot of filaments hanging off where it prints a layer and then parks a few inches back and lets it cool before doing the next layer.

As for setting the bar...This week I got a sample print from an FSL3D pegasus, I also printed the same model on this FFF machine (FYI, very little calibration just a bed level and height then print, it's a 3D Touch which is basically the precursor to the 3D Systems Cube X [they've fixed a load of stuff and made it much easier to use for a consumer])

Unfortunately my phone camera makers these look OK, the reality is that they are truly exceptional (even the FFF), they have a spiral staircase and a double helix inside....

IMG_20140417_183516.jpgIMG_20140417_183527.jpgIMG_20140417_183553.jpgIMG_20140417_183756.jpgIMG_20140417_183822.jpg

I really hope that the stock peachy can produce something that lies between the two (and seeing the later pictures from the updates I think it will)

In case you feel inclined to print the same in comparison, http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:99028 , this is scaled down to 29mm tall.

----------


## MartinCraft

Dayum. Looks really awesome! ^^

----------


## Anuvin

What he said. Those are seriously great. As much as I'd like to take a stab a printing that, I think I will hold off and let you try. I can't show the comparison you can. The d20 however, I will be trying as soon as possible.

----------


## Anuvin

Okay, here we go:












Just a calibration cube this time, and it's still too tall, but it's getting there. I am pretty happy with this print. I made my pinhole a bit larger, this is what I got. Recalibrated my x/y and they are very close to perfect. Just too tall, and a little off center, but that is probably my fault. I fiddled with the drip mid print, because I didn't think it was working. You can't even see it the first .5 cm while it prints, that's why I haven't bothered making any videos of printing. Next time I will see how smooth a print I can get, and see if I can't get my Z dialed in just right.

The sides are just about a perfect 10mm, just as I set for this print. It is 17 mm tall though. I think my drip sizes change due to the change in drip speed.

----------


## Morten

Thank you very much for these! Excited to see what you can achieve, keep 'em coming  :Smile:

----------


## Anuvin

Sure Morten, thanks for the feedback! One last one before bed, sorry for crappy cell phone pic.

Goldilocks


10mm all directions, just like I wanted. Still has that funny top though. I'll see what I can do about that next.

----------


## bovalis2037

Is that lighter blue on the bottom what fdm users would call a raft (support)? Meaning that the actual print is that solid blue?

----------


## Anuvin

Nope. The cube is supposed to be hollow, as it is. The top is too thick, but the outer dimensions are spot on.

----------


## nka

amazing Anuvin! 

Seems that the mods from Pete about the drip governor might fix this kind of bug.

----------


## DrLuigi

Looks quiet nice as the layers go,
But after that it kinda looks quiet bad?

Is this normal or did something go wrong?
Or is this very small?

----------


## kulfsson

@DrLuigi: Anuvin mentions that the cube is 10mm on each side, so quite small.

And here is the thing that i have a problem with at the moment with the Peachy. I have yet to see a decent, reasonably sized print. I understand that the beta users are still learning to use the device, so hopefully they will come, but I find it interesting that the Peachy team has yet to deliver any larger prints. Who will be the first to print f.x. the Yoda bust on the Peachy ?

----------


## DrLuigi

> @DrLuigi: Anuvin mentions that the cube is 10mm on each side, so quite small.
> 
> And here is the thing that i have a problem with at the moment with the Peachy. I have yet to see a decent, reasonably sized print. I understand that the beta users are still learning to use the device, so hopefully they will come, but I find it interesting that the Peachy team has yet to deliver any larger prints. Who will be the first to print f.x. the Yoda bust on the Peachy ?


Well a Reprap will be able to make a better print than that, But i realy hope that its just something with calibration or something, that it isnt that nice yet,

I do have to say that you don't see the layers that much anymore.

----------


## Anuvin

Keep in mind that this printer is a beta version of the Peachy, and it is barely calibrated. I have never 3d printed anything before, I am a total novice. So bear these things in mind as I show more pictures of prints. I will try that Yoda when I get it a little more dialed in. I cannot wait to try a larger print. I am trying to get a small print to work before I do, as I think anyone would with any printer, especially one in as early dev as Peachy.

----------


## Morten

While I second kulfssons point about larger prints, I fully support you in doing things in their proper order, with calibration being the obvious starting point, Anuvin. Thanks for posting pics! All of this makes me wonder when my own model will arrive. I was kinda late in discovering the kickstarter and chipping in. Hey, @Ryland, is there any way one can cheat and get earlier access to a Peachy if there is a good enough reason? Like wanting it very badly?  :Wink:

----------


## Feign

I agree with Morten, definitely get the printer firmly calibrated before going crazy with the possibilities.

As for when us non-testers will get that final version.  The Kickstarter schedule has final printers in the hands of backers around September/October (depending on when they backed it, Early bird specials and such.)  Those of us who got in late have a tenative October date, but I'd be _very impressed_ if they get delivered before Christmas.

----------


## nka

I'm pretty sure it will be ontrack as far as I know. No big flaw that would push the delivery right now !

----------


## Feign

> I'm pretty sure it will be ontrack as far as I know. No big flaw that would push the delivery right now !


Saying stuff like that is the surefire way to jinx it, man! :Stick Out Tongue: 

I know how things happen while a product (especially software) is in beta.  The hardware already looks like something I would have been glad to get for my $100.  The part I'm sitting back and watching is the software development (especially that iOS/Android app, let's not forget about that please).

----------


## jjmouris

Is it just me that is checking like every few hours to see if there has been more progress?

 :Smile: )))

----------


## Morten

It's not just you  :Wink:

----------


## Pete

I'll third that  :Smile:

----------


## Anuvin

Sorry guys. I was falling asleep on myself last night before the print finished. Here's the latest:





Attempts at julia- heatwave. http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:126567 Still getting there, obviously, but look at how close it is!

----------


## DrLuigi

Still doesnt realy look like the Heatwave, But its already a bit better  :Wink: 

I must say again, the layers are pretty nice now  :Wink: 
You almost can't see it, In guess you wouldnt even see it in real as the print is quiet small i guess?

----------


## ijmok

I May be wrong but i suspect its quite hard to photograph and show the detail, top couple of mm on photo1 look almost glass smooth, 

Thanks for sharing Anuvin, its ace to see so much of the early part of Peachy's development

----------


## mike_biddell

Looks like x and y are about half of the deflection required. The diameter of the neck looks a lot smaller than the Makerbot print.

----------


## Feign

I can certainly see _features_ of the Heatwave vase in your print, though I really have to look for them.  Regardless of the accuracy, I love how these (even the calibration cubes) have a kind of organic look to them.  From your comments though, it sounds like the calibration process is more an art than a science right now.

----------


## mike_biddell

Anuvin's print is getting narrower as Z increases and it should be getting wider as Z increases. It would look very like the original if it was calibrated that way. It implies to me that there is a problem with the z axis correction as the resin gets closer to the laser. X and Y deflections have to get larger as the resin gets closer to the laser. It's based on the cosine of the deflection angle. I wonder if Peachy has the correct z factor correction in the software???

----------


## Anuvin

Thanks for the feedback guys. You keep checking and offering insight, and I will keep the updates rolling as often as I can.

DrLuigi - You are right, the layers are getting better as I go, but it's a bit touch and go. Should get better as I nail it down. This print is a tiny 35 mm tall, which makes it really, really hard for the peachy to get the finer details.

ijmok - It is tough to show the detail, but I will do my best to give you decent shots to see what I am seeing.  Thanks for checking out my prints  :Big Grin: 

Mike - I think my z is still stretched out. Drip size changes are tough to deal with, but it's getting there. The neck is 1cm, and the print is 1.5 cm wide. I would say it is a little smaller, but getting to where it should be. Just gotta get that z a little tighter.

Feign - Yeah, it's far from perfect. The print, or the calibration process. But so early in the game, it's not surprising. I will try to get my print size up and get some finer details though, because even though you have to look for the details, they are there. And that is inspiring.  :Smile: 

Oh, and Peachy software in combination with user calibration totally accounts for the X/Y deflection. It still has to be dialed in a little, but the user sets the correction, so if the x/y is truly out of whack, it's at least partially, or wholly, my fault.

----------


## mike_biddell

Anuvin...... thanks for all your efforts on our behalf...... really appreciate it !!!!!!

----------


## Anuvin

Absolutely. If anyone wants me to try something specific, let me know. I am always down to try stuff.

Here is a very high res (slightly out of focus...) shot of that julia next to a smaller one I did, and a quarter for some scale. Also, as a bonus, an outrageously filthy paper towel.

----------


## Feign

Off the top of my head, there was that discussion we had in the other thread about the possibility of printing a lens, after a quick check of Thingiverse I found this one.  A pretty simple shape for the slicer, and you don't have to print it very big to get the desired result.  I'd think it would be best to print it upright unlike the heart print that the Peachy crew did originally, also add a boss to the top edge of the lens to capture any voids that might form as the resin shrinks while curing.

Aside from that, I'm sure everyone wants to see the Yoda head, or perhaps Pink Panther Woman... Because reasons.

If you want to go completely crazy, there's Emmit's Gear Bearing.  If the Peachy can handle a print-in-place assembly like that I'd be amazed.

----------


## nka

Hum, I think the peachy could be able to do this, only need to leave a space to not cure the resine between the gears !

----------


## mike_biddell

an interesting exercise would be to print a shallow object, such as a disk, several times with the resin at different starting heights. Is that possible? if x and y are properly calibrated, the disk should be the same diameter regardless of the resin starting height. How do you tell Peachy the resin height (z) to start with????

----------


## nka

the peachy does the calculation by itself afaik (didnt print yet, got my stuff yesterday).

----------


## Anuvin

You manually set the water/resin level to where you want it to begin, in most cases, slightly under the print grid. That is not an experiment that we need to run, I know that to be absolutely the case. The peachy is ridiculously consistent with simple shapes.

I am building a rig so folks who want to see bigger prints can be satisfied, I hope. Updates tonight.

----------


## patrik

Is there somewhere else that beta testers are leaving input, exchanging ideas and getting help because it seems that very few of the beta testers are anyway active here?

Beta testers that are here please keep up the awesome work! it has been really cool to see some pictures and get a feeling for how it is going!

----------


## DrLuigi

> You manually set the water/resin level to where you want it to begin, in most cases, slightly under the print grid. That is not an experiment that we need to run, I know that to be absolutely the case. The peachy is ridiculously consistent with simple shapes.
> 
> I am building a rig so folks who want to see bigger prints can be satisfied, I hope. Updates tonight.


Just wanted to say that its awsome that your keeping us updated on the Beta peachy printer you've received,

Again thanks  :Wink: 
And goodluck on your rig.

----------


## harpo99999

as a beta tester that has still not seen any more of the printer than the forum, I can NOT post what I have not done/got

----------


## Anuvin

Patrik  - Yes, there is another forum. It will be open to the public once the beta is in full swing, or just after. But there is no non-disclosure, it's just to keep stuff organized and very focused so first-tier can get through any big problems, and you are seriously not missing anything. The other first tiers aren't active there, and they aren't active here. They are makerspace people, and a few engineers and software people in various spots around the US who have introduced themselves and very little else. I am hoping they open up some more, but there is no obligation to do so. It also just occurred to me that they are probably very, very busy people, and it is likely they haven't even had time to complete their printer. It is also possible that the creator is communicating with them directly. I know from the forum that Rylan prefers all information to be in the forum, and for the forum to ultimately be totally open.

That said, nka, Pete, and I are really active members of this forum and the beta forum. Pete is still waiting on his because he is in the UK, and nka is a parent, so has limited time. Expect updates from them soon. Only a handful of kits were shipped, and not everyone wants to discuss it openly, apparently. The forum is being organized such that when 4000+ people go there for information, it's all in a cohesive, manageable state.

You can bet Pete, nka, and I will continue to fill everyone in on what is going on. Everyone here has all the info I have got to share.

So, unfortunately, my rig didn't quite pan out like I'd hoped. I slapped something together anyway, and I have at least something to show. 

People who want big prints, I am sorry, I have no large print to show you. But know that I want to print fairly large objects too. I have to get it dialed in first though, or I will waste a lot of expensive resin. So, to hopefully sate a bit of your thirst, I offer you this:









These are calibration shapes square, star, grid, and x line. That is a 8.5"x11" piece of paper. The laser point you see is totally without aperture, and is larger than needed and significantly more than powerful enough to cure resin quickly.  Probably too quickly, and will require an aperture just to limit the cure rate and to increase detail.

----------


## ijmok

Anuvin, your work and postings are greatly appreciated, 

Checking the updates they show just 7 kits ready for tier 1 dispatch, so if we have 3 of you here, i think that's pretty good!

Out of interest, i saw a post about tier 2 shipping, is it likely that tier 2 will benefit from improved instructions and minor mods that can be easily added to your setup, or if it a complete rework

Either way, thanks for the updates, ive been keen to see these kinds of progress since i backed peachy, good luck with the prints,

----------


## patrik

Anuvin - thank for sharing these insights!
I as well really appreciate all that you and others are sharing with us and for the time and effort you all are investing to help peachy. It is really awesome! 

Is the process for dialing it in mostly adjusting software settings or is it also mechanical adjustments?

----------


## nka

Yeah I'm sorry, got my Resine 2 days ago. Working about 3 hours on it yesterday... was working fine, but it take time to do everything (calibration, etc...). Anuvin have done the most of the stuff... he's now helping me !  :Big Grin:  Hope to have a Cube printed today. It it's working fine, I'll try something more complex and then a big object. But I'm still at the calibration (Focus of the laser might be bad right now).

----------


## Anuvin

ijmok - I am glad you appreciate my posts! You are right, a very small number of folks were in the first tier, I guess we got almost half of the first tiers, not bad. I believe Peachy Beta Tier 2 does have some hardware differences. The first tiers are posting whenever we find problems in the instructions. The instructions will still be being worked on when beta 2 begins, but perhaps most or all of the instructions will be perfect by peachy beta 3. As far as mods, I have a door I put on, and added a laboratory hose clamp (open ended hoffman, for anyone who wants to google it). I am pretty fond of these mods, and I think I would recommend it to all backers, but since things are still in flux, maybe I will just recommend that to betas. 

patrik - Absolutely! I am having a great time and I can't wait for more people to have Peachy printers in hand. We are going to have a lot of fun in this community as we get the Peachy printer working just right together. 

As far as dialing it in, it is both software and hardware. Mostly software. If you bump the mirror assembly hard while you are moving your lower res, you should go into the software and make sure everything still looks right, and potentially adjust some shear of the x or y axis. The hardware may also require little tweaks, but unless your circumstances are funny, you just need to do is twist a tube with a magnet in it.

----------


## nka

Hardware look complexe and very difficult at first, but when you do it, you realise it's pretty much easy and very simple!

Software is a bit tricky, but pretty sure it will get better very fast as I see this now!  :Smile: 

Can't wait to see more beta tester... it will go even faster!

----------


## colehard

Great work posting guys!  Waiting anxiously for Tier 2.

----------


## Anuvin

Nka nailed it. Hardware looks hard, is simple. Software works, but is a little fiddly, and rightly so, given the timeframe. The .wav to .gcode converter seems to work like a champ though, they must have been pounding on that for a good while.

----------


## martinf1977

Hi.

Looking at those calibration patterns - Isn't that what is described in the instructions (referring to the "square" here) 
Quote:
Q:When calibrating I see an open book shape rather than a square.             

*A:* We have seen this happen with some computer / monitor power  supplies, try using a cell phone charger (500ma or greater) or plugging  in to a different power source.

Maybe some issues can be resolved here with an external/different power-supply.?

Looking forward to seeing more prints. Keep up the good work

Kind regards
Martin - Really depressed that I only heard of this Kickstarter last week.  :Frown:  Looking forward to web-shop opening to the rest of us.

----------


## nka

Using external power make it pretty much stable. I was using internal power of my old laptop and movement were fuzzy.

----------


## Anuvin

> Hi.
> 
> Looking at those calibration patterns - Isn't that what is described in the instructions (referring to the "square" here) 
> Quote:
> Q:When calibrating I see an open book shape rather than a square.             
> 
> *A:* We have seen this happen with some computer / monitor power  supplies, try using a cell phone charger (500ma or greater) or plugging  in to a different power source.
> 
> Maybe some issues can be resolved here with an external/different power-supply.?
> ...


That is exactly correct. That part of the instructions is describing the diamond shape of my "square". You can fix it with a external power supply or in the software, or both!

Don't be depressed or down because you just found the project. Right now is the perfect time to join the forum! The betas are getting their printers and the updates should be really exciting from here on in. Ultimately, we are all waiting for the public release at the end of the year-ish anyway. That is when the printers will be a little more standard and the design a little more finalized and the hacks will start rolling in.

----------


## martinf1977

> That is exactly correct. That part of the instructions is describing the diamond shape of my "square". You can fix it with a external power supply or in the software, or both!
> 
> Don't be depressed or down because you just found the project. Right now is the perfect time to join the forum! The betas are getting their printers and the updates should be really exciting from here on in. Ultimately, we are all waiting for the public release at the end of the year-ish anyway. That is when the printers will be a little more standard and the design a little more finalized and the hacks will start rolling in.


I know. I just cant wait to get my hands on a unit. I am a Software engineer myself, and did my training in a Danish robotics company  - Been doing a lot of embedded development there.
I love to tinker with these kind of things, and feel like I missed out being part of this one... No doubt I will get a unit when they are available for the general public, but maybe I will opt for pro version. We will see....

Any more prints been done by any of the beta-testers? Seems like some time has passed since the last update on this thread  :Wink: 

Cheers and keep up the good work

/Martin

----------


## jjmouris

Has anyone printed a more straight forward shape yet? Something where we can see the accuracy? Like that lens or even just a cube?

More pics please!!!

----------


## Dino

two month ago .... i have reading only one thing : " CAN NOT WAIT TO GET MY HANDS ON THE PEACHY !!!!!!!!!"
And Now ???????
@ Anuvin ... your the only one that share his pics and experience with us. Thanks a lot for that !!!! Good work, go ahead !!! But don't see something from you for about ten days. 
You don't know how to go on? You arrived a dead end ??? Calibration don't work ? Share your thoughts with us. 
@ nka ...... What's about you ???? don't see nothing yet from you. a tiny cube ??  a large cube ? ... a dinosaur  :-) Please ....

Sorry, but is there nothing to share with us ?? ...really nothing ????

----------


## nka

Sorry, no update on my end. Many things prevented me from touching the Peachy in the lastest day. I might (I WANT!) be able to do this tomorrow, as I have a schedule for tonight  :Frown: 

I have some hongkong stuff comming to... so I can do some hack/upgrade test!  :Smile:

----------


## harpo99999

I have just received my beta peachy in the mail today, and will be opening the package a bit later tonight OR tomorrow morning

----------


## Pete

Well my first print stresses the importance of making your print stick to the grid (getting memories of extrusion machines here) but there are some redeeming qualities, the dimensions are dead on, the small wall sections look clear and smooth. I'm impressed with the reliability of the drip and the galvo. I'll try again tomorrow!

----------


## Anuvin

Killer! I see now that it is straighter and much larger than I thought. You nailed it! I don't know if the problem is cura or the print software or what, but I think it's clear that this project is a few (hundred, maybe, haha) software fixes away from being revolutionary.

----------


## martinf1977

It has gone really quiet in here hasn't it? Are there really no one yet with prints from their kits? Let the rest of us know about successes and failures... etc...

Hope to see some news here soon.  :Wink: 

Cheers
Martin

----------


## ijmok

Its quiet here, But the Official Forum seems busy,

http://forum.peachyprinter.com/

No access as im not a Beta Tester but the stats show much is being disucussed:

"Total posts *922* • Total topics *124* • Total members *58"*

----------


## Pete

I've been trying to sort laser issues which has resulted in mainly empty reservoirs and hence nothing to show!

...But, this has just come out in the last hour. It should be a 5 sided cube, not sure where 2 of the sides got lost, I'll get to bug hunting in the software. Over on the Beta forum there is some significant software effort going on so I expect issues like this when they start shipping backer kits should be few and far between. A lot of getting a good print seems to be lots of patience, don't expect things fast, I'm finding this especially difficult as a transition from FDM where less material = less time and this really does not seem the case with peachy although a lot of the proposed hacks should get around this problem, like pumps and drip regulators.

Here's the pics:

----------


## martinf1977

Thanks for the update Pete... Does there tend to be lots of laser issues?

Have you found a European supply of Maker-juice, or do you have to order from the U.S.?

Cheers, and good luck with the printer..

/Martin

----------


## Feign

Is it supposed to be a solid cube, Pete?  Because that top 'wall' looks like it could be a very squashed cube.  I have a feeling that even when the software is all squared away, calibrating the Peachy is going to remain an art more than a science.  Kinda takes me back to the days when even getting a photo from film onto paper was an art, a very difficult and sometimes hazardous art...

...For those who weren't born yet in those days, please don't tell me.  I feel old enough already.

----------


## Pete

Martin, I think I've had more issues than I should as I was trying to calibrate the laser with a webcam. The peachy team got me a strip down kit very quickly after my first went AWOL in transit and omitted these as I already had some on order, annoyingly they took significant time extra to get here too. 
There are a lot of improvements happened in the build instructions in the last few weeks. Moving onto calibration and using instructions i have no doubt will benefit from the same set of beta users sharing their experiences and difficulties. There is a calibration print to perform which I think at the moment operates in too narrow a region of 'working', there are many discussions here and I think that the cal print will be setup to guarantee at least something so that debugging is simpler and quicker.
The makerjuice I got was sent directly from the US as I suspect all the backers will be. There is a source of SUBG+ at iMakr in the UK or another distributor I think in Holland but I have not seen any SUBG at these alternative suppliers. That said, the shipping time for the maker juice from US to UK was only a week.

Feign, I've only transferred a handful of photos from film to paper and it was fun, it was only a few years ago and I think the kits set up to do it now are all but idiot proof. 
This should be a 5 sided cube (missing side at the print base) with 0.5mm walls. I did lower the drip speed when it got to the top for filling but I wouldn't expect this degree of thickening through this action. I imagine this is a bug somewhere in the gcode to wav converter also based on this next print you'll see, I shall be digging into code for some answers later.

This was a short clip I got of the peachy infilling that XY plane at the top, I find it mezmorizing!

----------


## DrLuigi

> Thanks for the update Pete... Does there tend to be lots of laser issues?
> 
> Have you found a European supply of Maker-juice, or do you have to order from the U.S.?
> 
> Cheers, and good luck with the printer..
> 
> /Martin



I also searched that up, You have quiet a bit of resellers, Even in Belgium.
So if Peachy is finished i might buy one, If there wasnt one in Europe i wouldnt have bought it due shipping and customs etc.

----------


## Feign

Oh now that IS strange...  I'd almost think it could be a smudge on one of the mirrors except that it doesn't show when the laser is running around the outer edge.  Maybe a jitter in the mirrors during diagonal movement?  Man, I just really don't know.

Here's hoping it's a software problem and not a hardware one.  Know if anyone else is having that same jittery/smudgy beam problem?

----------


## mike_biddell

Couldn't we video the print on a low frame rate and review the footage to see whether the missing sides were actually attempted. If they weren't, it is the software. And u dont have to use juice..... a virtual print. https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...com.ui.LapseIt

----------


## Pete

I promised on Page 2 of this thread that I would be using a Rook chess piece to compare printers and keep up to date with how my peachy is performing

This is from an FSL3D Pegasus touch, as far as I'm concerned it is only  second to the professional 3D systems SLA models I have seen....this is  what I'm aiming for, eventually:


This is from a 3D Touch which is synonymous with the 3D systems consumer level CubeX printer


And although completely unfair (because I haven't even started figuring out my known issues) is the first attempt at this on my peachy setup. I imagine over the coming days and weeks that this will get considerably better


Again the top seems to be stretched so I assume this is a software bug, but there is (and I'm afraid you'll need to take my word for this because I don't have mega photography skills) some reasonable and unexpected features:
-There is a well defined doorway in the middle of this picture at the bottom and a window above it and a window on the other side.
-The features of the brickwork are clearly visible although this is difficult to see in any picture
-There is definitely a spiral feature where the staircase should be although the inner double helix is missing

I'll continue to debug, calibrate, fix and contribute. I suspect I have my mirror speed set way too high for starters but this shows that a complex model can make it all the way through the tool chain and into a solid object which is certainly promising this early in my beta stage. I think with all the experience being gained and the improvements being made that the first time prints of real users units will be considerably better than this.

----------


## Pete

> Couldn't we video the print on a low frame rate and review the footage to see whether the missing sides were actually attempted. If they weren't, it is the software. And u dont have to use juice..... a virtual print. https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...com.ui.LapseIt


Hey Mike,
The two missing walls were not attempted (I watched the camera), I'm not sure yet where in the chain this goes missing. It could be an artefact of the cura slicer, I have seen with FDM before that things are missing because dimensions have been rounded down vs bead size but I just don't know yet. Given that all of the layers look identical and clean I suspect it is not an error with the player but either the slicer or the wav generator and I don't think the camera would help.
I was just thinking about writing a virtual peachy printer device that would process the audio being sent out and push drips in. There's probably even better virtual ways of doing this much quicker since you wouldn't need to process every layer or even push in drips and you could generate a bitmap per layer. Since the tool chain pushes out a wav and cue file if you didn't care about scaling factors you wouldn't need to use the player at all and you could do this all programmatically without too much understanding of how the printer works, you could scroll through the cues and generate an image per cue.........any volunteers?

----------


## mike_biddell

Pete, generating a bit map per layer is a great idea......... then turning it into 3D by layering the bitmaps, wud show the software output vs the Peachy hard print. This would definitely half split clearly between hardware and software issues. That is a tool which wud acclelerate development....... ask Rylan whether his team can do it LOL !!!!

----------


## Feign

> Again the top seems to be stretched so I assume this is a software bug, but there is (and I'm afraid you'll need to take my word for this because I don't have mega photography skills) some reasonable and unexpected features:
> -There is a well defined doorway in the middle of this picture at the bottom and a window above it and a window on the other side.
> -The features of the brickwork are clearly visible although this is difficult to see in any picture
> -There is definitely a spiral feature where the staircase should be although the inner double helix is missing
> 
> I'll continue to debug, calibrate, fix and contribute. I suspect I have my mirror speed set way too high for starters but this shows that a complex model can make it all the way through the tool chain and into a solid object which is certainly promising this early in my beta stage. I think with all the experience being gained and the improvements being made that the first time prints of real users units will be considerably better than this.


It seems obvious what's happening at the top of these prints:  The end of the g-code isn't registering with the g-code to wav, so when it gets to the end, it just keeps going with the last layer it had.

The other things...  Well yeah I'll have to take your word for this having those details.  I guess that's one problem with the material being crystal clear.  It's very hard to photograph details.

Maybe if you spray on a very thin layer of a neutral color paint to get the details to show up in photos.  Though at this scale, even a thin layer of paint would obscure some details...

On that note, what kind of resin are you using?  Is that how the Sub G red resin turns out?  The website makes Sub G look a lot more opaque.

----------


## Pete

The print does terminate itself but yes, it seems to repeat the last layer too many times. This is standard red SubG from what I know. I will make the effort to make better pictures when the printer is performing better (else there's not much point).

----------


## Feign

I wonder if there are any SubG colors that are more opaque...  Has anyone tried using the white resin?  Perhaps that's more photogenic?  I just ordered a liter of undyed SubG+ myself, even though I'm not scheduled to get a Peachy until October, I want to see what kind of stupid resin tricks I can do with it and a handheld UV laser pointer.

Perhaps there's a lag somewhere in the process of terminating.  Though that looks like it kept repeating for several minutes to strech it out that much, which is a heck of a long time for a processing lag.

----------


## Anuvin

Pete, those prints are awesome! You did a fantastic job calibrating it, I see. The Peachy shows so much promise, and your tower makes that even more obvious.

Feign, I am pretty much positive that the errors we see here are software based, and further, that they are partly due to Cura. When you run the calibration software, you can watch the laser draw a perfect square or other shapes. I think that proves that the software just needs to be worked on some more.

----------


## EthanSpitz

Hi all! Just stumbled onto this thread looking for people posting about their beta experiences! This is great! Keep up the great posts!

----------


## mike_biddell

What's CURA?????

----------


## Pete

CURA is a slicer/tool path generator, it generates GCode from your 3D model which is the vector instructions for laying down a bead in layers to create your object. See instructions.peachyprinter.com step 20.

I have confirmed that my 2 missing sides are from CURA and not from the peachy tool chain (although first inspection says the top repetition is a peachy issue). It would seem with a wall size on the object of 0.5mm and a bead size set to 0.5mm then the CURA software will map the bottom and right side but not the top and left sides!

It'll probably be a few days before I get more prints on here, I'm doing some work on the audio generation which will hopefully get rid of some of the artifacts on my rook model that shouldn't be there, although, I might run through a couple of simpler models which only have 1 contour per layer, like a square or circular column....these, like the two walls of my original cube should come out perfectly.

----------


## Nahoj

Have you tested using the layer viewing on the top right in Cura, to check the silced part?

Johan

----------


## Pete

Hey Johan,
I actually found it by looking in the GCode output but found the layer view online when I was looking for a gcode instruction I didn't understand.....much easier!

----------


## colehard

Just to let you know I have only had limited time with my Peachy, but just retrieved my first object from the resin.  I know it does not look like much but I proud of my first baby.  Now to tweak calibration and print something real.

2014-05-18 10.37.08.jpg

Decent cylinder - still some cal to do.

2014-05-18 21.34.41.jpg

----------


## Compro01

> Decent cylinder - still some cal to do.
> 
> 2014-05-18 21.34.41.jpg


Are you sure you put in enough resin for that print?  It looks rather like one of their column tests from update #13.

----------


## Feign

Actually, it kind of looks like there were bubbles in the resin.  Aside from that, not bad for a first print in beta.

----------


## mike_biddell

as a matter of interest, how long did the cylinder take to print?

----------


## Anuvin

The holes you all see in the cylinder are the result of some bugs in the software. I have been calling it the axe slice. It happens in almost all my prints. It is being worked out, or already has in the newest version of the software. Of course it comes with it's own bugs... *sigh* But everything is moving in the right direction, and bugs are getting fixed.

----------


## mike_biddell

Virtual printing would be good to accelerate development. Just take the audio output file and render the pixels at the coordinates in the file and you would be able to view the print in a cad package without using any resin. This should exactly mirror a hard resin print, and if not, would highlight clearly whether a problem relates to hardware or software e.g. the ripples in the cylinder wall (hardware or software?).

----------


## jjmouris

But what if the program that takes the audio and turns it into coordinates suffers from "bugs". Then you could be chasing down an error in the wrong place. It is a shame that most of us are not of any use helping to fix these bugs and we are not yet at the stage that it comes down to us messing around with the print speed, apparture size, laser power and so on. We just have to wait and keep trying each time a bug gets fixed I guess. However, one day all of this will be history and printing something with a peachy will be as normal as playing candy crush on your mobile phone.

Keep at it guys and well done for getting this far!!!

----------


## mike_biddell

errr I hear where you are coming from, but the likelihood of errors in simple software to render a set of coords, should be very much smaller. Read (x,y,z) and set pixel, repeat.

----------


## Synchron

Is there a definition of the wave to calc the coordinates? Can someone post a sample object, wave file and his/her dripsize/speed. also the height of the laser over the liquid has to be known. 
With this test data i would try to create a virtual printer... but no guarantee that i can do that but i will try my best  :Big Grin:

----------


## mike_biddell

Synchron, if u can achieve that, we can all start printing before we get our printers....... magic. I sincerely believe this would greatly accelerate the software development. I design all my electronic circuits in a simulator and so far, the building of the actual circuit is always a formality. This concept is the 3D printing equivalent i.e. if it works in the virtual printer, it will work when you commit to resin. If colehard would send u the cylinder output file, you cud check whether the virtual print showed the holes in the cylinder walls. An interesting validation exercise.

----------


## erikk

Its actually a hardware bug that might be solvable with software. When the audio is "laser off", its at a different location than "laser on". Its a problem with the circuit, but we hope to get the software to get a calibrated offset whenever the laser is off. When the laser turns on at the same point on every layer, there is a small section that never gets cured properly because the laser wasn't there in time.

Until then I've used a bandaid fix that doesn't get rid of the twitch when the laser comes on, but randomizes the starting point of each layer, so it doesn't happen at the same point on every layer. 

The program I made to randomize the gcode was my first useful python program and first time looking inside gcode files
It still needs hand editing to set the speed to start at (I probably should have left the first layer alone), and there might be other things.
gcode_scrambler.zip

----------


## colehard

I would be glad to post the cylinder .wav and .cue files if that is what you are looking for.  

While printing, it does look like the laser covers those empty spots, but even my eye (with protective eyewear ish) can tell it is not as intense over that spot.  All my prints have had a gap on the back side (cubes too).  It looks to me more like where the laser is ending its sweep rather than starting - but that is not a scientific observation....

Sorry I did not time the print.  But I am running about 305 drips per mm with the reservoir I have.  And I had quite a fast drip going.  3-4 per second maybe.  There were probably only single drips between sublayers.

My biggest issue is that the XY scale is only 30% of the Z scale.  I am trying to get the latest alpha software up an running but won't get any time until the weekend.

----------


## colehard

@erikk - I like it - will try it out on my cylinder at the weekend and let you know how it goes.

Or, we just keep the laser on, but scan it fast out of area between sublayers.

----------


## Slatye

Colehard - I'd be interested in getting a copy of the files, if you could post them here. Probably won't have time to do anything with them, but I might get around to it.

----------


## colehard

I tried the new Peachy Tools software that has been rewritten with some enhancements.  Not sure if they meant to fix the axing but that doesn't seem as bad.  However, now the software goes straight from GCode to printer control.  No in between CUE/WAV files.  I don't think my computer is quite up to doing this in real-time (without compiled code) so i have a couple of other issues.  

But I was able to get a print out.  My resin is getting a bit messed up so that may explain some of the holes.  I am only running with a couple of mm of resin on the salt solution.  I still have problems with drip and vertical calibration - The 'cube' in this picture is placed next to the cylinder from last weekend.  My XY scaling is much better.  

2014-05-26 07.44.38.jpg2014-05-26 07.44.38.jpg

I really rushed this out to have something this weekend so pretty good all things considered.  I need to spend some more time on my Z calibration and really need to spend time on setting up my saline flow - I am wading through salt crystals on my work bench because of spillage.  I am so desperate to play with the printing that I took shortcuts on mounting/saline flow that are becoming a pain now.  Oh, and BTW, you do not want to get resin on your lips so some up with a good siphon solution (no pun intended) to get the salt water from the build tank back to the holding tank. It burns.

----------


## colehard

OK, really pleased with this one.  Tardis - unfortunately the pictures don't show the detail - the windows and windows with slats in them on the top two rows came out perfectly.  The top fill is really nice.  I had two drip problems at 2mm and near the end hence the offset base and top where i knocked my print reservoir.  My Z axis is about 150% out of wack.  I will try once more with modified drips/mm and enough water in the top tank.

Also, note that even though the base got offset by a few mm, causing a gaping whole above the space, that side did start printing again.  This gives an idea of the overhang capability which looks pretty good.  

It is much more impressive in real life.
2014-05-26 15.04.06.jpg2014-05-26 15.05.28.jpg2014-05-26 15.05.01.jpg2014-05-26 15.04.48.jpg2014-05-26 15.04.43.jpg

----------


## colehard

So, slower drips are smaller - I think someone else made that finding.  Anyway - got a full tardis out with no holes.  Just a bit short in the Z.  The detail is really good.  Looks like I also have to recenter my beam as the print has a bit of a lean.  The detail on every side of this is perfect.  Wish the picture could be better - someone suggested painting, maybe I will try that sometime.

2014-05-26 19.31.23.jpg

----------


## Aztecphoenix

> So, slower drips are smaller - I think someone else made that finding.  Anyway - got a full tardis out with no holes.  Just a bit short in the Z.  The detail is really good.  Looks like I also have to recenter my beam as the print has a bit of a lean.  The detail on every side of this is perfect.  Wish the picture could be better - someone suggested painting, maybe I will try that sometime.
> 
> 2014-05-26 19.31.23.jpg


how ow is the Z axis off? I thought the drip counter once calibrated to the size of the build tank was supposed to ensure accurate Z height, it shouldn't matter if you have a fast or slow drip, am I missing something?

----------


## ijmok

Amazing Colehard,

Especially when you see the three post consecutively

Its often hard to remember how small these prints are until you refocus on the paper towel in the background,
I saw a post on the kickstarter page yesterday asking about progress and July shipping, which I'm down for, although not expecting (never was) to be honest,  but with your insider knowledge (official forum) what's the biggest issue holding Peachy up at present?
Either way awesome work and thank you for your work,

Rob

----------


## Feign

I sure wouldn't mind seeing some of these with a little bit of paint on them.  The first Tardis I kinda had to look at it a while before figuring out what was exterior detail and what was interior texture.

Has anyone thought to try Rylan's tip of rice and resin as filler yet?  I feel most of these would look a lot better filled.

----------


## kulfsson

I like the prints that I am seeing and I am trying to gauge the size. Do you have any measurements for us ? I can kind of use the ruler that is in the background of your picture, but not sure if it is in Inches or CM ;-) While I understand that small prints are economical with the resin, I am still wondering if someone wouldn´t like to bite the bullet to print a larger item. I don´t know how the imperfections scale though, but it would be nice to know if they get worse or perhaps lessen with scaling up. 

@ijmok: I was the one commenting on the Kickstarter page. I am not counting on the July shipping either, but it would be nice to get an official update about the current status.

----------


## Spelljammer

The slower the drip the smaller the drops...within reason. A constant drip speed is needed or calibration height vs speed in software. Height of the reservoir changes based on water level as well. A constant height apparatus like a pet waterer could be used.

constant drip height.jpg

----------


## rylangrayston

> The slower the drip the smaller the  drops...within reason. A constant drip speed is needed or calibration  height vs speed in software. Height of the reservoir changes based on  water level as well. A constant height apparatus like a pet waterer  could be used.
> 
> constant drip height.jpg


bang on !
I have spent the last 3 days building a system like this using almost all the same parts we sent in the kit
its going well and its helping for many reasons 

1  less pressure means you dont need to make such a small hole with your  valve to set the drip rate, making the valve less sensitive to clogging  by small particles ( which is a big problem)
2 like you said it gives  you and even height which gives you an even pressure... my bubler only  verys in height by 1 mm or less!!!
3 buy covering the top of the  second space (above the top of the water that stays at one level ) and  piping that air to the height you want your printer to stop at 
you can make a printer that auto stops dripping at any height! 
4  since you have all that top container volume NOT affecting pressure now  you can hold 20 prints worth of water above your printer letting you do  20 prints before you need to recycle water back to the top 

This is all working rather well right here infront of me now  :Smile:  
in fact last night i left it running and it went for a good 8 hours steady. 
The  only bug I have to work out with it yet is a design where air stays  only in the dripper.. right now it randomly travels down the hose :S

2014-05-27 19.50.15.jpg2014-05-27 20.12.03.jpg

----------


## Aztecphoenix

My plan is to have my main reservoir below my build reservoir and use a pump to bring the water up to a smaller secondary reservoir with an overflow that drains back into the main, this way the pressure always stays the same.

----------


## mike_biddell

Is it possible to keep a constant pressure in the saline feed by using syphonic action to pull the water out of the top tank? This will create a column of water of constant length and therefore in theory, constant pressure? Just realised that people are using syphonic action. Not sure why that doesn't create a constant pressure?? The laws of physics say it should !!!!

----------


## jjmouris

> My plan is to have my main reservoir below my build reservoir and use a pump to bring the water up to a smaller secondary reservoir with an overflow that drains back into the main, this way the pressure always stays the same.


Very clever! And you could also run the printer in reverse / lower the resin level as and when you wanted by putting a hose from the bottom of use printing reservoir down to the big bucket.

 :Smile:

----------


## Feign

> Is it possible to keep a constant pressure in the saline feed by using syphonic action to pull the water out of the top tank? This will create a column of water of constant length and therefore in theory, constant pressure? Just realised that people are using syphonic action. Not sure why that doesn't create a constant pressure?? The laws of physics say it should !!!!


Sadly, it doesn't work that way.  While the water in the siphon is indeed taller than the height in the tanks, it doesn't add to the pressure of the tanks.  For instance, in Spellfire's example, only the pressure of the lower tank is relevant because it is what is open to atmosphere.  Rather, the top surface of the water in the top tank is under a negative pressure (vaccuum) equal to it's height above the water's surface in the lower tank, which would of course increase as the tank empties.

Fluid dynamics is one of the most counterintuitive mechanical fields.  Until you really get into the math of it, a lot of things _seem_ to disobey physics.

----------


## Aztecphoenix

> Very clever! And you could also run the printer in reverse / lower the resin level as and when you wanted by putting a hose from the bottom of use printing reservoir down to the big bucket.


actually, I'm going to have a drain valve in the bottom of the build tank that runs through a custom made "oil" separator before draining into the main reservoir so I can reclaim any excess resin, I actually hope to have it all automated in the end so that as soon as the print is finished the valve is automatically opened, the build tank is drained, and the pump is turned off, I also plan to use three different sized build tanks for different models, no use having a huge build tank (1.5' x 1.5' x 1.5') for a small object the build would take too long as the water would have to fill up so much volume.

also, by having the main tank on the bottom I don't have to worry about the printer being too top heavy at the start of each print meaning one little bump could knock it over causing a huge mess.

----------


## colehard

I am not sure the separator will be necessary.  If you have the drain in the bottom of your build tank you will not get resin unless you drain too far.  I strongly recommend setting up your fluid movement ahead of time.  Resin on my lips because I rushed my fluid system in a haste to get printing was not a good thing.....

----------


## Aztecphoenix

> I am not sure the separator will be necessary.  If you have the drain in the bottom of your build tank you will not get resin unless you drain too far.  I strongly recommend setting up your fluid movement ahead of time.  Resin on my lips because I rushed my fluid system in a haste to get printing was not a good thing.....


you're right, it isn't necessary, but I want a system that I can start a large print, go to sleep, and have everything done by the time I wake up without any human intervention.

----------


## rylangrayston

> actually, I'm going to have a drain valve in  the bottom of the build tank that runs through a custom made "oil"  separator before draining into the main reservoir so I can reclaim any  excess resin, I actually hope to have it all automated in the end so  that as soon as the print is finished the valve is automatically opened,  the build tank is drained, and the pump is turned off, I also plan to  use three different sized build tanks for different models, no use  having a huge build tank (1.5' x 1.5' x 1.5') for a small object the  build would take too long as the water would have to fill up so much  volume.
> 
> also, by having the main tank on the bottom I don't have to worry about  the printer being too top heavy at the start of each print meaning one  little bump could knock it over causing a huge mess.


I am really looking forward to seeing all this in action Aztecphoenix
be sure to post lots of pics of all your innovations!!!

----------


## kulfsson

I have been patiently waiting for more prints but nothing seems to be happening. Have you all stopped trying to get quality prints out of the peachy or what is the deal ? I for one would really appreciate some up to date information about where you are all at.

----------


## Chayat

I think they are all too busy making awesome things to post them here for the likes of us to gawp at

----------


## Pete

Sorry to disappoint guys but there's not really anything of much merit to show from my end yet, although the first prints were pretty quick and helped identifying the issues, fixing them is a whole other ball game. That said the peachy guys are constantly bringing improvements and the software really is seeing regular and major updates (keep an eye on the GIT repository)

----------


## kulfsson

Well the new software update peaked my interest again. Since we are now nearly one month along from the last post in this thread I am thinking it might be prudent to ask if anyone can/wants to share their newest test prints ?

----------


## kulfsson

Another couple of weeks pass by and no prints from anyone to show ? Is there a major issue with the Peachy that is discouraging people from trying to print anything ?

----------


## Chayat

I'd like to see anything coming out of a peachy. The updates have felt beta-centric recently with little for us mere end users to get excited over

----------


## Feign

I'm not a beta tester myself, but I'm betting that the printing/messing around with the Peachy will pick back up once kids are back in school.

----------


## curious aardvark

It's increasingly looking like  a great sounding idea that's just not going to end up being practical. 

we're nearly a year on from the betas and still nobody's printed anything remotely worth showing - it's not looking good is it.

----------


## curious aardvark

It's increasingly looking like  a great sounding idea that's just not going to end up being practical. 

we're nearly a year on from the betas and still nobody's printed anything remotely worth showing - it's not looking good is it.

----------


## Calamity

Not a year on, just a few months on. It /is/ odd that there's no new photos, but I'm just guessing that the few beta testers who have been posting here, haven't been able to fix their problems, so have had no progress. Since it is 'beta', however, I'll just reserve my judgement until November.

----------


## nka

I stopped working on the Peachy by lack of time. I have kids and now a newborn...  :Frown: 

As for what I see, no-one is focusing on printing. They are focusing on improving the build and software. Improving the dripper, improving the calibrations and stuff like this. Most test are made on a light reaction paper without even actually "printing" right now.

There was some new test, mainly to compare two methode of calibration, but nothing to show for now.

It's advancing slowly, but surely!  :Smile:

----------


## Dino

nka ....congratulation !!!! We all knowin what the canadian are doing when the hard, dark and cool Winter comes  :Smile:   I hope you don't name the baby "Peachy" .....  :Big Grin: 
Are you have the overview how much beta-tester are posting on this forum? If you know them, let them know that we would very happy to see some pics or short videos from the tests, even with lr-paper or to read some words about the stuff they are doing ....

----------


## Feign

I'm gonna echo Dino's sentiments.  Congrats, man!
I'm also agreeing with Dino that even videos of projections on glow-paper would be pretty exciting right about now.  Something to remind us visually that yes the testing continues.
(heck, the software update video was pretty freaking exciting IMO with the jitter reduction code displayed)

----------


## nka

There's an update coming soon, you'll love it!  :Smile:

----------


## Chayat

OH EM GEE. I just saw that update. Those prints are beyond what I had been hoping for the final Peachy.

I wonder how many generations advanced the printer that produced those was from the ones sent to the Betas?

----------


## Feign

H... holy crap, that Yoda looks GOOD

For those not following Rylan's youtube channel:



While there are a few flaws still, these look beyond 'good enough' for $100.
In the words of my old boss, "IT WORKS! SHIP IT!"  :Wink:

----------


## Chayat

> While there are a few flaws still, these look beyond 'good enough' for $100.



I agree wholeheartedly.

However, we don't know if these prints came from a $100 peachy. They could be from a dev-model which hasn't yet been refined down below the $100 price point. I'm not saying it's a cheat or anything but we don't know what kind of changes they've made. It could be that they are using an advanced drip-counting device that cant yet be made with the skill level they are pitching at (yet).

----------


## Feign

> However, we don't know if these prints came from a $100 peachy.


It would be unlikely that much at all changed in the hardware side, aside from whatever damping mechanism they were hinting at earlier. Even then, they've seemed pretty good so far at keeping their eyes on the bottom line through this design process, I don't imagine their new damper will be showstoppingly expensive.

And the flaws that they _do_ have pretty closely point to them not having an advanced drip-governor (or advanced level adjustment that has been discussed) in place for these.

Almost all the problems that have been solved between Pete's Rook Test back in April and this new Rook have been solved in software (and better photography technique) rather than hardware fixes.

----------


## nka

I can assure it does come from the Peachy 100$ hardware. 

The only problem right now is, to acheive that, you need a lot of calibration and this calibration isnt metric, but more luck/art. This is kinda hard right now and that's what thye are working on.

----------


## Chayat

That reminds me of a question I was harbouring...

How mobile is the peachy printer? Once I have mine up and running and calibrated at home would I periodicity need to recalibrate it? 
If I wanted to take it to a friend's or a local hacker-space would I have a whole re-calibration procedure or is there a quicker one that you do after the printer has been built.

Or... is this something we just don't know until Peachy V1 (Peachy RTM) is out?


That raises another question, what do we call "that peachy that is yet to come" as to make it distinct from the many beta iterations?

----------


## Feign

I don't think I've ever even considered the idea of making a mobile Peachy set up...  But yeah, I'd recommend against it.

It think right now they're on PP30 or PP31 for their hardware designation.  It've never been clear on whether this means "Peachy Printer 31" or "Prototype Peachy 31".  If the latter, the first one released to the public would just be "P1"...  Otherwise it might end up being "PP40" or some even higher number.

So yeah, we the community probably need to come up with a better name for the customer-ready Peachy when it comes.

----------


## Synchron

I would only add a zero to the prerelease versions, like "PP 0.31" / "PP 0.32" and after that "PP 1.00"/"PP 1.01".
So you don't ignore the full range of development, that was done in the prerelease state, but there is a clear cut to the released version.

----------


## NoctumSolis

I think it'd be nice to give the first release version a name. Peachy Printer Prometheus sounds good to me.

----------


## Compro01

> I think it'd be nice to give the first release version a name. Peachy Printer Prometheus sounds good to me.


I can't get behind that.  I played too much Earthsiege as a child.

----------


## Synchron

hm... i hate these names... but this is only my personal opinion...
If two customers compare their versions and one has PeachyPrinterPeanutbutter and the other PeachyPrinterPancake no one knows what's the higher version. How much versions are between these two and so on...i think these names make it more difficult...
but, like i said, it's my personal view on this...

----------


## mike_biddell

> hm... i hate these names... but this is only my personal opinion...
> If two customers compare their versions and one has PeachyPrinterPeanutbutter and the other PeachyPrinterPancake no one knows what's the higher version. How much versions are between these two and so on...i think these names make it more difficult...
> but, like i said, it's my personal view on this...


I agree..... the simplest approach is to use six digits (the release date for that model) e.g. 130814. This would be the model released on 13/8/14

----------


## Feign

Synchron, I agree.  Trying to find a graphics card for instance is an exercise in frustration because of illogical numbering schemes...

But Mike, you've gone too far (if you're even being serious, which I'm not sure).

----------


## Chayat

But you cant call it PP[number]

When you say it out loud it sounds like you're cataloguing urine samples!

----------


## Aztecphoenix

Why not just use the Zulu alphabet (alpha, bravo, Charlie, delta, ect...) twenty six versions down the road we can start thinking of something else just remember KISS it sucks having to look up your version because of some off the wall version name (I'm talking to you Android)

----------


## Synchron

Android / Ubuntu and some more do exacly this. The starting Letter of the version name is the next letter in the alphabet. ("Ice creme sandwich" is the Version before "Jelly bean")
but...first of all...no one understands this, second...i dont like it....

----------


## NoctumSolis

To be perfectly honest, I actually prefer numbers. If you really want to distinguish release from development, just add a couple of prefix columns. 10xx 11xx etc.

The name thing was not meant seriously.

----------


## kulfsson

Hi all.. No prints available from any of the beta testers yet ?

----------


## curious aardvark

you do get the feeling that by the time they've changed every single piece of the original model, upgraded the laser, changed the dripfeed and laser movement setup and essentially built an entirely different machine - they just 'might' be able to print something simple. 

I really liked the initial idea - but no matter how clever something is - if it doesn't work and isn't practical. What's the point ?

----------


## Aztecphoenix

> you do get the feeling that by the time they've changed every single piece of the original model, upgraded the laser, changed the dripfeed and laser movement setup and essentially built an entirely different machine - they just 'might' be able to print something simple. 
> 
> I really liked the initial idea - but no matter how clever something is - if it doesn't work and isn't practical. What's the point ?


did you even watch the last update? it does print (and quite well I might add) there are only a few things left to adjust, look back at the original Cupcake CNC from MakerBot (or should I say TakerBot) its print quality was pathetic by comparison and it was based on long proven technology, the Peachy Printer is all new (at the time of  its original release) never been tried technology.

----------


## Buggeroo

I am absolutely thrilled that the Peachy is now at a point where prints like the ones from the last update are possible. However, the guys have a massive amount of experience now, dealing with the printer, so the only thing I worry about at this point, is whether it will become accessible enough for the average user. This is probably mostly a question of making some clever software and hopefully the community will produce some tools to deal with whatever quirks are left post-release.

In any case, the latest prints have definitely rekindled my hope that we will in fact, receive a functional 3D-printer, at some point.

----------


## Chayat

> I worry about at this point, is whether it will become accessible enough for the average user.


This is my worry too, I cant remember where but I'm sure early on we were told that the peachy would be usable by someone relatively inexperienced. I'm starting to worry if my techy ability will be good enough to make my peachy print as well as we have just seen. I don't mean to suggest that the peachy guys are not doing an amazing job and wont be producing an amazing bit of kit but the last prints were just so good compared to what I was expecting.

Am I going to be able to turn the bag-o-parts they send me into something of similar capability? I think when the release model does ship I'm going to try to wait until I can read/watch about some others build theirs. I don't wanna mess mine up with a silly mistake.

----------


## Feign

> you do get the feeling that by the time they've changed every single piece of the original model, upgraded the laser, changed the dripfeed and laser movement setup and essentially built an entirely different machine - they just 'might' be able to print something simple.


To my knowledge, the talk of changing the drip feed and laser movement are chatter and speculation from non-beta folks.  Not so much a window into everything happening with the betas as it is wild speculation.  The only really solid thing that we know has been truly replaced on the Peachy has been the laser and the core circuit, and they just received the testing boards for that _last week_. (Peachy got the boards, I don't know how many of them have been sent out to testers yet.)  Aside from that, the only hardware problem they've talked about is the hysteresis on the mirror dampers, and we don't know if that has been ironed out yet (or even how big or small a problem it was.)

Very likely, the beta testers are waiting for the new board to ship before attempting to print things like the Peachy employees have done in the official update.  (would like to hear something from one of them to confirm or deny that, though.)




> I really liked the initial idea - but no matter how clever something is - if it doesn't work and isn't practical. What's the point ?


Like Aztecphoenix said, you just haven't been paying attention, the latest update is making it look much more workable than ever before.




> Am I going to be able to turn the bag-o-parts they send me into something of similar capability? I think when the release model does ship I'm going to try to wait until I can read/watch about some others build theirs. I don't wanna mess mine up with a silly mistake.


That's a totally valid concern, the Peachy is a whole lot less like a Formlabs printer and a whole lot more like a RepRap kit (though the average RepRap kit is around $400)

In general, a low-end RepRap kit can get first prints that look about like the very first Beta tester prints in this thread, needing quite a bit of tweaking before getting decent prints.  And I don't know of more than a few RepRaps anywhere that can make prints comparable to the Yoda and Rook that Rylan showed last week.

----------


## curious aardvark

> Like Aztecphoenix said, you just haven't been paying attention, the  latest update is making it look much more workable than ever before.


Yes I was paying attention - hence the: 'it  might work with all new parts' comment. 
Which definitely seems to be where it's heading. 

Is the laser still controlled by the speaker socket in a pc, and the drip by the microphone ? That I liked, that was amazingly clever. 
But practical ? maybe not.

----------


## Feign

Well, like I said, they've only had to completely redo the laser and circuit board.  The drip sensing and sound-card-based control are both still definitely in there.  Putting new parts in it is the point of having a beta test.  What point would testing serve if they were just going to send the first version of hardware out to buyers?

I'm actually wondering when the Beta testers will get those new boards and other parts to continue testing...  Until then, this thread is pretty much just us all speculating restlessly while waiting.

It probably depends on your definition of practicality, those are the things that make it a $100 laser projector that's suitable for SLA printing.  I call that practical.
It also seems to require a whole lot of calibration, which you might find impractical, everything has a trade-off.  I find a few nights of calibrating something is worth saving ~$500.

----------


## curious aardvark

lol when someone with a peachy shows me a yoda and prints the Lefab shop articulated robot with 11 working hinges and joints, I'll believe you have an actual useful and practical 3d printer. 

All I've seen in the last year or so are a few crude geometrical shapes. 

Actually when i saw it on kickstarter i i was more interested the ryan said it would also double as a 3d scanner - for $100 I'd buy a 3d scanner, if - at some undisclosed time later - it suddenly became a working 3d printer, that'd be a bonus. 

Maybe you're all working on this the wrong way round :-) The maker community needs cheap 3d scanners more than it currently needs more budget 3d printers.   

Just a thought :-)

----------


## jsondag

I'm far more interested in a cheap 3D printer than a cheap 3D scanner.  I think a lot of people are probably the same way. The scanner would just be a bonus feature. You can make 3D models or use other methods (lazy susan+webcam, kinect, etc.) to get your object to print. The printers on the other hand are still too expensive for a lot of people. 

I do agree though that not seeing anyone other than the creators making anything is a bit disheartening.

----------


## curious aardvark

> or use other methods (lazy susan+webcam, kinect, etc.) to get your object to print


And they are all a major pita. 
Dunno what kinect cost, but I bet they're not that cheap. 

Nope, if the 3d scanner side worked well I'd buy a peachy and probably never buy one drop of resin :-)

----------


## oninoshiko

They've showed the yoda print. It's still got some holes, but you can make out some remarkable detail on the muppet. I'm not interested in scanning at all, myself. I'm much more interested in printing original models. what interests me is not just the cost (that's great, btw) but the fidelity.

----------


## Aztecphoenix

> And they are all a major pita. 
> Dunno what kinect cost, but I bet they're not that cheap. 
> 
> Nope, if the 3d scanner side worked well I'd buy a peachy and probably never buy one drop of resin :-)


if the only reason you came to this forum is to take jabs at the Peachy Printer then please leave, the Peachy has already proven itself and has already advanced beyond the current home FDM printers, and FYI you can pick up a Kinect for $80 or less online.

----------


## curious aardvark

lmao - not taking jabs at peachy. As i said it's got some great ideas in there.
Thought it was great when it launched. Just seems to have ground to a halt since then. 

Is being reminded of that what's really annoying you ?

----------


## NoctumSolis

Note the posts beginning with "lol" and "lmao" and the derisive terminal question. In short: Don't feed the troll.

----------


## Feign

> Note the posts beginning with "lol" and "lmao" and the derisive terminal question. In short: Don't feed the troll.


I agree, and while I would normally consider taking moderative action for trolling, I feel it's not really necessary _yet_.  For anyone who has read the updates from the Peachy team in this forum, it's pretty clear that CA is doing more to harm his own credibility than he is to inflame the emotions of Peachy backers.

But really, have a little patience, and everyone keep the thread civil.

----------


## curious aardvark

okay - so laughing at people getting their knickers in a twist when you point out that no prints = no working printer, is trolling is it ? 
Okay, Fair enough - I'll just laugh on the inside :-) 

But something that doesn't work - is always going to be something that doesn't work - no matter how much you wish it would work. 
I'm sure with a few more changes to the hardware, it'll start working. Still for $100 ? 
who knows.   

It's a great concept with some really clever engineering. I'd love to see it working properly - and maybe one day I will.

----------


## Feign

Talking about the state of a printer isn't trolling, the tone of your posts are what needs changing.  Let's be completely honest here.  You're not laughing at people getting mad, you're laughing_ to get people mad_, and that isn't going to be tolerated.  This is a very friendly and open first warning.

Okay, here you go.  This is a link to the newest prints from the hardware the beta testers don't have yet.  It's one thing to point out flaws in a released product, and quite another to ignore the working version of a product still in beta and use very old results from the first runs of the beta.  Yes, it's still for $100, some of the changes actually _lowered_ costs.

Nobody here is mad at you for calling the baby ugly, only annoyed about you acting willfully ignorant and self-contradictory.

----------


## Chayat

I must admit I'm still finding it hard to believe we are looking at a $100 product. Will we have to purchase this new dampening system separately or is it in the $100? 

Additionally having watched that assembly video I'm feeling a little better about my ability to construct the peachy. The only bit that I'm still dreading is attaching the two tiny magnets to the flexy-strippy-bit. (where they use tweezers in the video) I just know I'm not going to get them in the right place/aligned or even worse I'll be gluing the tweezers to the printer :/

----------


## NathanGrayston

> I must admit I'm still finding it hard to believe we are looking at a $100 product. Will we have to purchase this new dampening system separately or is it in the $100?


You are indeed still looking at a $100 product!  The new damping system replaces the old one and is included in the $100 kit.

----------


## Feign

Speaking of, I would love to see a Hardware Update that talks a little bit about the new damping system.  I'm still trying to wrap my brain around how the old "oiled tab damper" had memory to begin with.

----------


## rylangrayston

Hey Feing perhaps I can explain what caused the memory here. 

Ever notice how a droplet of liquid can stick to the side of a wall, It dose this because of a property called adhesion, we think that when the tab moved it was dragging the oil droplet into a new position, just like it would take a bit of energy to move a droplet up and down a wall. That little bit of energy was affecting the position of the mirrors. 

There were other problems with oil too, it was spilling during shipping, it ran on to the mirrors and made them hard to clean, and it was hard to get just the right amount of damping. 

To understand how the new damping system works I recommend goggling "eddy currents"  which is something you can see in action in videos like this. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu1uRvErM80

----------


## Feign

You know, I had seen those demonstrations before, but I always thought they required very large and powerful magnets, rather than just common neodymium magnets.  When I'm home I'll have to scrounge up some copper pipe and see how well it works on the rare earth magnets I have.  Though it looks like thicker pipe causes more damping.

Are you planning to have an extra magnet for this or can you just put the existing magnet on the mirror strip in a small ID copper tube without affecting the field from the coil?

----------


## 3dspider

hmm- saw this on youtube....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sQzbZt34fc

very interesting...

----------


## jstrack2

20140913_123859.jpg20140913_124618.jpg20140913_124658.jpg

Here are a few pictures of a rook I printed which is the same rook in the update with the rook and Yoda. I am using the magnetic dampening. I need to calibrate a bit more and my stand got bent which caused the rook to look like the Leaning Tower of Pisa haha, but otherwise I think that it looks pretty good. It looks better in real life though, since as was mentioned before it is not easy to photograph well. I was quite happy that the individual bricks making up the rook as well as the stairs look almost perfect in real life (though this is hard to see in these pictures). Hopefully this shows that anyone with a Peachy printer will be able to make nice prints.

By the way making large prints is totally possible now, I just don't feel like using all of my resin!

----------


## mike_biddell

> 20140913_123859.jpg20140913_124618.jpg20140913_124658.jpg
> 
> Here are a few pictures of a rook I printed which is the same rook in the update with the rook and Yoda. I am using the magnetic dampening. I need to calibrate a bit more and my stand got bent which caused the rook to look like the Leaning Tower of Pisa haha, but otherwise I think that it looks pretty good. It looks better in real life though, since as was mentioned before it is not easy to photograph well. I was quite happy that the individual bricks making up the rook as well as the stairs look almost perfect in real life (though this is hard to see in these pictures). Hopefully this shows that anyone with a Peachy printer will be able to make nice prints.
> 
> By the way making large prints is totally possible now, I just don't feel like using all of my resin!


Any holes?

----------


## jstrack2

> Any holes?


No, but I think that the rook in the update did not either. I think that only Yoda did. I want to fix up my printer some first, but fairly soon I will try printing Yoda.

----------


## MemorianX

It looks very promising, and it's nice to see that "normal" people can make nice prints too

----------


## oninoshiko

> Attachment 2677Attachment 2678Attachment 2679
> 
> Here are a few pictures of a rook I printed which is the same rook in the update with the rook and Yoda. I am using the magnetic dampening. I need to calibrate a bit more and my stand got bent which caused the rook to look like the Leaning Tower of Pisa haha, but otherwise I think that it looks pretty good. It looks better in real life though, since as was mentioned before it is not easy to photograph well. I was quite happy that the individual bricks making up the rook as well as the stairs look almost perfect in real life (though this is hard to see in these pictures). Hopefully this shows that anyone with a Peachy printer will be able to make nice prints.
> 
> By the way making large prints is totally possible now, I just don't feel like using all of my resin!


Even uncalibrated, that looks really good. I can't wait till the store is open so I can get one (I missed the kickstarter).

 is this the one that has the stair-case the the double-helix in the middle? did both of those print too (it's hard to tell from the photo)?

----------


## jstrack2

Yeah I put together the magnetic dampener before the instructions were posted and I didn't give the threads the right amount of tension. So it is calibrated some, but I will have to redo the thread.

Yeah you can not really tell from the photos, but the stairs and double helix printed very well.

----------


## oninoshiko

> Yeah I put together the magnetic dampener before the instructions were posted and I didn't give the threads the right amount of tension. So it is calibrated some, but I will have to redo the thread.
> 
> Yeah you can not really tell from the photos, but the stairs and double helix printed very well.


oh awesome! I know they were having some trouble with the helix coming out of the slicer weird from that model. I'm glad to hear they have that fixed!

----------


## Feign

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sQzbZt34fc


Amazing how physics sometimes jumps up and surprised you.





> Attachment 2677Attachment 2678Attachment 2679
> 
> Here are a few pictures of a rook I printed which is the same rook in the update with the rook and Yoda.


If you printed the Rook that was in the update video, then who printed the Yoda?  Was that a beta tester print also or was that an in-house Peachy?

----------


## NoctumSolis

> If you printed the Rook that was in the update video, then who printed the Yoda?  Was that a beta tester print also or was that an in-house Peachy?


I believe they meant that it was the same 3D file. Notice that the colour is different.

----------


## jstrack2

Sorry I meant the same file (or at least a very similar file).

----------


## Feign

> I believe they meant that it was the same 3D file. Notice that the colour is different.


So it is...  My memory is apparently colorblind.

This is actually quite enlightening, that the printer is not just getting results, but _repeatable_ results.

It's probably not going to be making Emmett's Heart Gears any time soon, but it's certainly better than could be expected for the price.
(I hope I heard a 'challenge accepted' somewhere in the beta team.)

----------


## Chayat

I don't mean this to be negative about the peachy team but having a beta tester produce something of similar quality is a really big deal. Up till now the peachy has been like a sexy new concept car, desirable but not necessarily a repeatable feat. Now someone else has produced something to the same quality it's moved the peachy to a new level of viability. Can we get a video of one of these items being printed in the next update? and maybe some more detailed information on time and drip rate/method

----------


## mike_biddell

Jstrack2 has done an excellent job with that print..... me want more.

----------


## jstrack2

I  tried to print a Yoda and Julia Vase, yet they have holes in them. I will post pictures tomorrow. Also I will be trying some other prints, so more you shall get!

BTW the prints should look nicer if they are bigger. When I get a new stand in a few days I will start increasing the size of my prints some. I think that it is worth repeating though that there really isn't a limit to the size (provided you wait long enough and have enough resin). With bigger prints the curvature will be less extreme and I am guessing the holes would disappear. Most of these models are intended to be printed significantly bigger than I am printing them.

----------


## NoctumSolis

> Most of these models are intended to be printed significantly bigger than I am printing them.


That's very interesting. Could it be that the slicer, due to reduced scale, creates holes where the walls are thinner? Or causes under-curing of very thin sections?

----------


## mike_biddell

> I  tried to print a Yoda and Julia Vase, yet they have holes in them. I will post pictures tomorrow. Also I will be trying some other prints, so more you shall get!
> 
> BTW the prints should look nicer if they are bigger. When I get a new stand in a few days I will start increasing the size of my prints some. I think that it is worth repeating though that there really isn't a limit to the size (provided you wait long enough and have enough resin). With bigger prints the curvature will be less extreme and I am guessing the holes would disappear. Most of these models are intended to be printed significantly bigger than I am printing them.



Interested to see whether your holes in Yoda are in the same places as the 'official' print. That would tell us a bit more about whether the holes are predictable based on the process or just random.

----------


## Feign

That would be an interesting experiment.  I doubt we'll have any kind of "hole predictor" software to help optimize a model for the Peachy, but we might be able to come up with some general guidelines for making models that will print small and detailed without holes.

Though I think what would make most people sit up and take notice of the Peachy would be a Julia vase that is actually vase-sized.

----------


## jstrack2

juliavase.jpgyoda1front.jpgyoda1back.jpg

Alright so these are prints I did yesterday. Both are very small, even smaller than what the Peachy team did. Today I spent time playing around with settings and experimenting with different things, so hopefully tomorrow I can print a lot better Julia Vase and Yoda.

I think that the holes tend to occur where these is a lot of curvature, but they are not totally predictable. I don't all that well know what specific problems occur by shrinking models. As I experiment more hopefully I will get a better feel for it.

Finally I agree Feign I think that a big print will get people interested. I am not yet ready to go for the gold and print something huge, but I will start making some bigger prints soon and eventually I might try something very big.

----------


## jjmouris

Hey guys, looks promising. Take it this is with the new magnetic dampener?

For me accuracy is the main concern and not large overhangs or super thin walls. So although it is nice to see the Julia Vase and Joda, these very rough objects with no real measurable reference points don't really tell me that much other then that the printer seems to work well. Don't get me wrong, I am loving the ongoing development.

Where can I upload a STL file of an object for people to print that may give a better feel for the achieved accuracy?

----------


## mike_biddell

> juliavase.jpgyoda1front.jpgyoda1back.jpg
> 
> Alright so these are prints I did yesterday. Both are very small, even smaller than what the Peachy team did. Today I spent time playing around with settings and experimenting with different things, so hopefully tomorrow I can print a lot better Julia Vase and Yoda.
> 
> I think that the holes tend to occur where these is a lot of curvature, but they are not totally predictable. I don't all that well know what specific problems occur by shrinking models. As I experiment more hopefully I will get a better feel for it.
> 
> Finally I agree Feign I think that a big print will get people interested. I am not yet ready to go for the gold and print something huge, but I will start making some bigger prints soon and eventually I might try something very big.


I'm wondering whether time lapse filming the print would shed some light on why the holes are occurring ? The 'lapse it' app on any Android phone would do the job

----------


## rylangrayston

> I'm wondering whether time lapse filming the print would shed some light on why the holes are occurring ? The 'lapse it' app on any Android phone would do the job


Well your going to love a certain update coming out soon  :Smile:

----------


## mike_biddell

> Well your going to love a certain update coming out soon


Tantalising......... I wait with eager anticipation LOL.

----------


## oninoshiko

> Well your going to love a certain update coming out soon


I can't wait!

----------


## Morten

> Well your going to love a certain update coming out soon


Damnit! Now I´ll have to refresh this site even more often.

----------


## mike_biddell

Love the update, I always thought a print simulator would be a great diagnostic tool.

----------


## jstrack2

I have been printing several Yodas. All still have holes, but I have learned some from printing them.


The first one I printed that I showed before is about 22mm tall and is filled with holes. The head, front and back all have holes. It is one layer thick.
20140928_233220.jpg

Next I printed a larger Yoda that was two layers thick. It is about 33mm, but this is because I didn't calibrate the z-axis well. It should be about 40mm. It has significantly fewer holes, with a lot by his throat, but just some small ones scattered throughout the rest of him. He is nearly hole free in the back. The next three prints had no holes in the back.
20140928_233208.jpg

Next I recalibrated the z-axis so it is about 40mm tall this time. Also I made Yoda three layers thick. He has about the same amount of holes as last time in similar locations, although as I mentioned there are no holes in the back.
20140928_233132.jpg

Next I set the "Bottom/Top thickness (mm)" Cura setting to 0.14mm (from 0mm for the previous prints). This tells Cura to fill in flat surfaces to get filled in. If say you have a small cube stacked on a big cube and have this setting at 0 then the small cube won't print, since the top of the big cube will be not filled in and thus the little cube will have nothing to stand on. Since Yoda has so many tight curves I wondered if the computer thinks tiny places on him are flat too and is not printing them. This turned out to be true. By making this change there is less holes, especially in the throat area. Still there are some holes though. It is three layers thick and 40mm tall again.
20140928_233120.jpg

Next I again printed a 40mm tall three layer Yoda. This time I set the "Bottom/Top thickness (mm)" Cura setting to 1mm. It very slightly reduced the holes, but nothing very significant at all. However it did make Yoda look significantly uglier in my opinion.
20140928_233410.jpg

----------


## jstrack2

Finally I kept the same settings as last time except made a big Yoda. This Yoda is about 65mm tall. I accidentally significantly overcured him though since I got the laser better focused when preparing for this print, so the results weren't so great. This is why it looks rough. Also it has holes all throughout the bottom part of him (front and back) and some other ones randomly scattered. As with every single print there is a hole by the eyebrows.
20140928_233235.jpg

Here are all of the prints together so you can see the relative sizes.
20140928_233045.jpg


I will keep trying to improve things and will post the results later.

----------


## ijmok

jstrack2 thats awesome,

Presumably a tighter focus translates into finer detail prints, 65mm is taller than 80% of the parts i print with my current FFF Printer,

Does anyone have a firm theory on what's causing holes at the minute? or is that something hopefully the simulator will improve?

Either way awesome work, its really good to see peachy delivering recognisable but more critically repeatable results in the wild

Rob

----------


## rylangrayston

> jstrack2 thats awesome,
> 
> Presumably a tighter focus translates into finer detail prints, 65mm is taller than 80% of the parts i print with my current FFF Printer,
> 
> Does anyone have a firm theory on what's causing holes at the minute?....
> 
> Rob


Nathan and I just filmed an update this morning about all the causes of holes we have found so far. Many were found using the print simulator, and others were found by people therorizing and testing, and watching the printer closely.

Big thanks to jstrack and to tookys both of whom are very activley using their printers right now, and spotting many things we didnt know about, such as the effect of the "Bottom/Top thickness (mm)" Cura setting.

----------


## iplayfast

> Nathan and I just filmed an update this morning


Just so you know, I love these updates. it makes me feel like I'm involved with the project even though I'm a lurker.  Also one  of the things that was mentioned near the beginning of this saga was that you always try to make things so they want to be were you want them to be, and this is how you came up with the water leveling innovation.  Ryan you're an inspiration!
(gush gush).

----------


## jstrack2

Here is a rook that I just printed.

20141017_234341.jpg 20141017_234251.jpg 20141017_230919.jpg

 I programmed an Arduino Mega and used it instead of the sound card. I was having problems with my laser before so when I replaced it I really underestimated how bright the new laser was. Therefore this print is way way overcured. Also the beam isn't as focused as it should be. This cut down on the resolution some. Still it isn't too bad. The last picture includes the rook that I did a few weeks ago. The new rook is about 50 mm tall.

----------


## 3dspider

Wait... this is a possibility? The peachy might be able to be run from an arduino? That would be very nice indeed, if I could use an arduino, a usb power supply, and a sd card shield to run a peachy without having it take up a smartphone or computer. I was planning on using a chromebook running crouton for my host, but if i could get it running on an arduino, that would be even better.

----------


## jstrack2

Yeah I think that could be done. Also I think eventually using a cheaper microcontroller might be nice too. I should also point out that the double helix in this rook did print, but it somewhat blurred together from overexposure and the beam being not well focused.

----------


## Feign

I sure would love to see something in those pictures for scale...  As is I can't quite tell if that new Rook is thumb sized or soda can sized (I never really got a good idea of the previous Rook's size either).

I'm excited for when I'll get mine.  May-June feels so far away, I was hoping I would be able to print some things from it for my wedding, but as it is I'll only have a month to do anything with it.
Nothing against the Peachy, but I'm glad I had a backup plan.

----------


## jstrack2

Congratulations Feign!!!

Here is a picture of the rook by a ruler (in inches) and a new Yoda. The Yoda is hole free!

20141021_210201.jpg 20141021_205911.jpg

I did this by blasting the Yoda with tons and tons of light. This is obviously not ideal. As you can see it caused Yoda to have very clear layers (where the resin broke over). This can be fixed by raising and lowering the resin level each layer (or by just not blasting it with tons of light of course!) Also because there was way too much light some stuff cured that shouldn't have. For example the bottom cured deep below the wire mesh. This causedthe bottom got screwed up when I was trying to remove the mesh. But anyway these problems should all get fixed eventually. 

It sucks that you may not have time to print stuff with it for your wedding. When it does come though it should work great!

----------


## Feign

Wow, it looks at least like there's the option of a trade-off between layer resolution and strength.  Though to put it in perspective, that's a better print than most $800 FFF printers would give you at that scale.  A while ago, I suggested skipping the wire mesh entirely and having the print start with a large X-pattern that goes beyond the walls of the print reservoir on the first layer to anchor the print directly to the reservoir.  You would have to cut the print loose from the walls after draining the fluid out, but it would keep you from having mesh-removal problems like that.

(to note, my Backup Plan B is the MOD-t I pledged for, Backup Plan C is a friend who owns a Makerbot 2X which I've been helping him get running.  I don't have a Backup Plan D and that bugs me a little.)

----------


## X-Line

Wow for a 1.5" print even with the noted over exposure that is pretty sweet looking.

----------


## 3dspider

hmm... a cheap peristaltic pump could be used just to raise/lower the water height between layers to "dip" the print. as long as the other end of the peristaltic pump was not connected to a water tank, you could just use the water in the line for the dipping action, thus removing the chance of altering the "z" height.

----------


## jstrack2

Feign I think that you could have a 3D printing service be plan D. Though they are very expensive. If you really need something I could print it for you and ship it. I agree that the wire mesh could be improved. At least for the container I used it is hard to get stuff to stick to it, so I am not sure if what you described would work. However perhaps adding a little strip of something that is easier to stick to on the bottom of the container would fix this problem. If you or anyone else has more ideas about improving this I am very curious to hear!

3Dspider I think this will work too. I am about to start working on raising and lowering the height by using a solenoid to push something to displace the resin. I will probably also try using a pump.

----------


## jstrack2

20141203_012442_LLS.jpg20141203_011747.jpg 

Here is a small owl I printed. I had some trouble getting a good photo of it since it is clear, so in real life it looks better. For example you can clearly see the feet on the log in real life, but it isn't so easy by these pictures. Also to save on resin the owl is only 4cm tall and 2cm wide at its widest point, so the details are pretty small.

----------


## User_Defined

Nice print Jstrack2!

You seem to be the only one printing anything these days! Has there been a slowdown of beta development?

I have some questions:

Are you intentionally making those layers thick to avoid surface tension problems and holes?

Is this a first-shot print (or are there failed owls before this)?

it appears the only thing in the way of amazing prints is the layer height. I can't wait to see more progress!

----------


## jstrack2

There has been a slowdown in terms of number of beta testers actively working. However there is a lot of progress being made.

This was my first attempt and I just made big changes with my printer so I I could certainly do better with the current setup.

As for the layers they actually aren't thick at all, it just looks that way in the picture. In fact they are only 0.01 mm thick! For some reason though my laser is shaking every few layers, and this is making the end result look rough. I am not sure why this is, but hopefully I will be able to figure out what is causing that real soon. If you look the top of the head you can kind of see how it is smooth. It is actually even much smoother than that. The layers are too small to see in the sense that curves seem totally continuous (in real life, not the picture).

 For this print I have a stepper motor dropping a plunger thing to raise the lower the resin between each layer. Therefore the cured resin gets fresh resin with each layer. A problem that I noticed though is that there can be more than 0.01 mm of new resin added (because resin has non zero viscosity) so over many layers parts can start rising out of the resin a bit. I think if I print at say 0.03 mm per layer this problem will go away. Also high frequency vibrations could help. Or of course lower viscosity resin. Plus if the laser is weak so it is only partially curing then you could get smoothness that is far less than 0.01 mm. In fact I don't know if there is any real limit to how smooth it could get (or at least down to the molecular level).

----------


## User_Defined

sometimes steppers could vibrate a bit from their holding torque, check the motor and its mounts maybe?

or it could just be that the mounting of the laser and printer assembly is not rigid enough? 

That is all I can think of without the setup being physically in front of me! 

I'm thrilled to hear how progress is being made, and your post has renewed my anticipation in receiving my printer! 

keep up the good work!



- UD

----------


## jstrack2

Great I'm glad to hear it got you excited!

 I don't think it is the stepper or a rigidity problem, but I don't know what it is. Some layers the laser moves smooth, some it shakes. Sometimes half way through a layer it is smooth then shakes. It doesn't appear to be caused by a layer being too complex for the speed am moving the mirrors at. I think this because some times a layer will be smooth then basically the exact same layer will have a bunch of shaking. Maybe the PWM I am doing (instead of the normal analog voltages) is causing problems. I don't know.  I will just have to debug it with various tests.

----------


## Calamity

Thank you for the post, Jstraw. It's heartening to see continued output.

----------


## MagicDan

That looks awesome.  I can't believe they are getting that type of print from a $100 printer.  (I know, just a bit more for the mount/etc.)

As far as the plunger goes, how about setting up a balloon, or "bulb" under the surface (in the water part) that inflated and deflated with each layer?  Would require some extra setup but might be able to raise the level without disturbing anything or taking away any resin.

Just brainstorming a little.

The print is awesome, keep up the good work!  

I printed the picture to scale to get an idea of actual size and detail level.  It's really making me happy I bought one.

----------


## jstrack2

Thanks!

I like the name Jstraw by the way haha. I've been thinking about changing my username. Maybe I should go with it haha.

----------


## jstrack2

Wow all this enthusiasm is great! I'm glad I printed and shared it! 

I can't believe the printer's capabilities either. And this is with obvious problems preventing even better prints (like the occasionally shaking laser). 

I was initially thinking about some kind of elastic thing like you are describing. However I decided to have something just go up and down since to "inflate" the flexible object it will have to fight the water pressure (which could be a lot of force if the container is tall). With the up and down method the object going up and down is mostly just floating in the liquid, so less force is needed. The force is just the difference in weight of the plunger versus the liquid it is displacing's mass. There is no water pressure to fight. I know this is kind of a crappy explanation of what is going on, so I could try to explain it better if you'd like.

Also the setup I have doesn't really disturb the resin much since the plunger part is mostly isolated from the rest of the container (liquid just flows back and forth between the bottom of the plunger part and the rest of the container). If it is set up right no resin will flow into the plunger part, although I screwed up with mine and some did. I am going to replace the container I am using soon so it is easier to use.

----------


## MagicDan

Perfect explanation for me!  

I am excited to see so much progress on this printer.  I have no doubts that most (if not all) of the problems will be resolved.   Looks like it's headed the right direction.  A big thanks to you and all the beta testers!

----------


## rylangrayston

> Great I'm glad to hear it got you excited!
> 
>  I don't think it is the stepper or a rigidity problem, but I don't know what it is. Some layers the laser moves smooth, some it shakes. Sometimes half way through a layer it is smooth then shakes. It doesn't appear to be caused by a layer being too complex for the speed am moving the mirrors at. I think this because some times a layer will be smooth then basically the exact same layer will have a bunch of shaking. Maybe the PWM I am doing (instead of the normal analog voltages) is causing problems. I don't know.  I will just have to debug it with various tests.


Hey Jstrack2
Big Thanks from me and everyone at Peachy for all the awesome work your doing! 
At Peachy we have been using cura to slice models into g code. 
Just the other day we noticed that cura seems to be be injecting very short movements where the laser is told to turn off while the mirrors are told to move less than a mm. 
It dose this at every vertices on the back of the owl model we are slicing. We dont know why it dose this( could be a feature we dont know about for fdm printers or a bug)  but it definitely causes shaking because we have a laser on/off positional offset in our analog circuit.  You have built your own circuit (awesome!!) so I dont now how yours reacts to twitching the laser off 20 times during a layer, but its probably not helpfull. We implemented a quick hack that solved it. our hack is an if statement that goes something like this:   If a gcode tells the mirrors to move with the laser off for a distance that is less than the laser spot size, ignore that gcode and move on to the next one. 

Hope that helps take the shake out of your printer.
If not try doing something really really repetitive like repeating 4 g-codes drawing a square and printing a column, your printer should be able to do a column like this one from update 13 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...5305991&page=7) :
3fd04d54221c7945338e8b55a3af3f8b_large.jpg

If it can do that then you likley have a software problem not a hardware/ circuit/ environment problem.

----------


## rylangrayston

So as of update 44 you can see that the 100 dollar printer kit is working much better. We have made lost of changes to get it working better and many of those changes are in the circuit!
At the time of this writing there are only 3 new circuits on the planet ( here at peachy ) that work really well. We Just got them working and we dont have any of them out to our beta testers yet. 
So our beta testers dont have the ability to do prints like we have shown in update 44 yet.  Jstrack2 and Pete Have taken beta testing to a hole new level and made there own circuits from scratch, 
So there printers may have a unique set of abilities and problems. 

Just thought Id drop in and note that, the beta testers have done an amazing job in printing as much as they have.

----------


## User_Defined

Those updated prints came out wonderful, and this is already well within 90% of usability!

My biggest question now from the latest update is this:

The layers seem to be small, but I can still clearly see layers/artifacts in the prints. Do you know what the reason for these artifacts is? Could it be laser accuracy? I know the peachy is not the Form1+, and I don`t expect it to be as good as such an expensive printer, but I am very curious about what the reasons are for the difference in print quality.

For example, remember the column prints? They looked almost like glass. What is preventing the current prints from printing like that? 


If it is simply laser accuracy, this can be resolved with a linear magnetic angular feedback IC. It would take your input voltages and then tie them directly to an angular output! Many of these sensors have analog outputs, so you could theoretically just make an analog error amplifier with your existing coil driver amplifier. These chips are under $2 and have only 3 pins! I mentioned all of this earlier, and let me mention once more that this could elliminate the need for magnetic dampening. Just make sure to get a medium precision IC.

If it is not laser accuracy, maybe the forum members can help brainstorm and throw ideas on the potential causes? I remember Jstraw (hehe) saying his laser spot was shaking randomly, but this was resolved?

-UD

----------


## Feign

They've already mentioned that the Peachy so far is high precision, but low accuracy.  I wouldn't mind seeing the exact same g-code run on two identically built and calibrated Peachy printers, to see just how different they are.

An interesting thing just occurred to me: Could it be possible that the neodymium magnets they are using don't have _exactly_ the same amount of magnetic force?  If so, then the equation for voltage in to angle out might vary from printer to printer.  Calibrating at just one size might be insufficient if the strength of the magnets is an assumed number.  Also, is the output to the coils _really_ a smooth curve as it increases?  Even tiny fluctuations could account for the apparent roughness of the final print.  Most likely the root of this goes all the way back to the sound card (which makes it a problem that has been known for quite a while time now).

----------


## rylangrayston

> Those updated prints came out wonderful, and this is already well within 90% of usability!
> 
> My biggest question now from the latest update is this:
> 
> The layers seem to be small, but I can still clearly see layers/artifacts in the prints. Do you know what the reason for these artifacts is? Could it be laser accuracy? I know the peachy is not the Form1+, and I don`t expect it to be as good as such an expensive printer, but I am very curious about what the reasons are for the difference in print quality.
> 
> For example, remember the column prints? They looked almost like glass. What is preventing the current prints from printing like that? 
> 
> -UD


This is exactly what were working on today at peachy.  There are many theory’s we have, We know that the peachy can do glassy clear prints with g code now because we have finally seen it do that! 
Ill be talking about it more in an update soon. 

We found out that one of the settings we used in cura has a bug that causes the laser to blink off for a very short time in between nearly every g-code! Thats what was causing the 21 spots on the owls back. 
once we fixed that we got an owl with about 500 layers of glassy clear printing at a time, then every 500 layers there was an ugly spiral or ring up the print. 

My theory is that the spiral is caused by the laser on off, we spiral the spot that the laser turns on and off as we go up the print.
others here think that its not a spiral, its a ring, and that its the furnace or the fridge turning on periodically. 
We will know soon! 

Im confident we can get much closer to what those columns look like with g-code! Time will tell. 

I Really like what your suggesting with the Haul effect sensors.. last time we looked into this I think we found that the sensors themselves had to much Hysteresis.... can you recommend a chip that you think would work?
Basically what your suggesting is an analog PD or PID system with magnetism as the source of the feed back right? 
That could work reallllllly well!

----------


## User_Defined

sorry for the late reply, off topic: I just replaced my windows XP with LUBUNTU, it is a crazy learning curve but totally worth it!

When I suggested this I was doing a quick search on digikey:

*Product Index > Sensors, Transducers > Magnetic Sensors - Hall Effect, Digital Switch, Linear, Compass (ICs)*


I use digikey for small orders, yes it is more expensive but they have amazing stock and the website is very organized. Once I find my parts, if they are too $$ you can cross reference on www.findchips.com for cheaper competitors. 

[edit] Wrong link here, but it was a digikey link to a magnetic Hall sensor. I lost the link but since the following sensor is better, you can find it if you are curious!

- Hysterisis error is from temperature cycling (not magnetic hysterisis) 
- symmetry error only applies if you are flipping the magnetic field polarity during operation.
-ratiometric error is also irrelevant since your supply voltage is fixed.
- Linear sensitivity seems like it will be the only relevant error, and it is only ±1.5%

1.5% is still too high in my opinion though... but this is a $2.31 chip. 


Diodes Inc sensor looks better:
http://www.diodes.com/datasheets/AH49E.pdf

the linearity of span is 0.7% which is better than the allegro. I think that this if the chip I would try! In this rare case I think the through-hole version is better since you can easily manipulate its orientation to fit the field on the sense magnet. (maybe eventually make a circuit board for it. Be sure to have it on the opposite side of the mirror driving coil!

How to use it:

Ive never done this before, but I would start by looking how a magnet could be connected to the mirror axis, and then look how the sensor would need to be placed to have that field move in such a way that the sense would see it. 

You might need to do a bit of reading and look at some diagrams on how to use these sensors. 

After the system is set up with glue or tape, you would then run the thing to see what kind of an output you get! Then feed that to an amplifier to get your proportional feedback signal, and send it back to your main amplifier. 

From there youll have to use the Zieglar Nichols method to figure out the PID values.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziegler...Nichols_method


I know it may seem like quite a bit of work, but I have a feeling it would be worth it if you are having significant accuracy problems. At the very very worst case, you develop it for the pro version and then open source the circuit so I can copy it and add it to my peachy  :Stick Out Tongue: 

good luck and dont be shy to shoot me a line if you guys get stuck.


-UD

----------


## rylangrayston

> sorry for the late reply, off topic: I just replaced my windows XP with LUBUNTU, it is a crazy learning curve but totally worth it!
> 
> When I suggested this I was doing a quick search on digikey:
> 
> *Product Index > Sensors, Transducers > Magnetic Sensors - Hall Effect, Digital Switch, Linear, Compass (ICs)*
> 
> 
> I use digikey for small orders, yes it is more expensive but they have amazing stock and the website is very organized. Once I find my parts, if they are too $$ you can cross reference on www.findchips.com for cheaper competitors. 
> 
> ...


Ok very good advice. We just may order that chip and give it a shot, I was wrong, historeses was not the isue last time we looked into it, it was how to actually position the chip in the field, but I have more ideas for that now ... I dont think its too much work( its definitely worth it!) , Scott has already made an analog PD system that acts on capacitance  feed back for the pro, its on a bread board at our maker space right now... we may have to add I to it, but other than that we sould be able to calulate, change some values and just use the same circuit. 


Thanks again this is a very good lead.

----------


## User_Defined

Im truely glad to be of help! 

I just saw your ted talk and I am thrilled that so many people on this forum, as well as beta testers are helping to propel this project to its amazing potential. 

It would be really cool to have some closed loop mirror system in place on the standard peachy, then really all that would be left for extreme accuracy would be proper Z sensing! 

As I said those latest prints are already well worth the base model value, and definitely usable IMO. I really cant wait to see what the final fine-tuned version will yield. If you do end up going closed loop with those little chips, I expect great things, and I expect peachy to have the amazing problem of keeping up with orders  :Stick Out Tongue: 

keep it up, and thanks for keeping us forum members "in the loop"!


-UD

----------


## jstrack2

Here are some birds that I printed and then my sisters and I painted for Christmas.

----------


## jstrack2

Here is another picture of them hanging:



Here are three other birds:



Finally here are all of the birds prior to being painted:




This is different resin that is a lot thicker. I am having some trouble with it because of this, but I think I will soon be able to deal with that.

----------


## jstrack2

Also here is a T rex that I printed: 

It isn't yet perfect, but I think that prints are getting better!

----------


## MagicDan

Can you post a picture with something in it for scale? (Coin, paperclip, etc.?)  It looks awesome! (T-Rex scale)

----------


## jstrack2

This is what it would be like to be eaten by a T-Rex

----------


## Chayat

Awesome!


I neeeed my peachy! >_<

----------


## Feign

I couldn't have said it better myself, Chatyat.

Also it looks like something significant improbed between the large birds and the small ones.  There's almost no visible layers on the small birds and the skull.  Any clues as to what happened differently for those? (they look _amazing_, by the way)

----------


## jstrack2

Well there is some problems being caused by surface tension that cause certain shapes to come out better than others. Right now I have been raising and lowering the resin between each layer so that there is always a fresh coat. I am hopeful though that I will soon be able to get around the surface tension issues.

I think that the Peachy is going to just keep getting better and better. Also since it is so versatile you can just slap on some changes and see if it improves things, rather than needing a new printer. It's really exciting!

----------


## rylangrayston

Wow and with a thicker resin I know that is not an easy task.
Amazing work jstrack2 Very glad to have all your help on this project.

----------


## User_Defined

Any new prints from the beta team? Or updates in general? 


- UD

----------

