Printable View
This is a question I am posing to this community. I'm just wondering for personal reasons.
Do you feel that the technology behind RepRap 3D printers is advancing at an adequate pace, or do you think that it could be advancing faster?
Open source is supposed to bring about lots of innovation. Do you feel that it is doing that?
I believe it could be advancing faster. This is due to the limited number of people within the 3D printing community. Most people build their printers and want to build 3D objects. The fastest and easiest way to do this is to purchase a kit or follow a design with a set BOM. This also means the majority of users are concentrated on established protocols because information about Reprap 3D printing is very scattered and the wiki isn't updated much. Most printers use the well established RAMPS 1.4 because it is well understood and compared to other electronics it is far more documented than say Gen6-7 boards. Far more powerful boards such as Smoothieboard or Azteeg X3/X5 are new and have far smaller user base. The entry into Reprap is not necessarily an easy or cheap one either. This prevents the majority from experimenting with brand new technology because of how finicky the machines are just to even print a 3D object. Therefore, there is much more development within the customization of 3D models than there is specifically in technology.
It is progressing though, paste extruders, filament extruders, new autoleveling features, are coming, but we need better documentation to really ignite the process.
It is moving fast, but I totally agree with MK-X on this one.
The community is still in it's infancy, open source still has to really lock down a few standards to thrive. And I think that comes down to logic (code). The hardware will follow, you can use any board you want, and the logic will already be adapted to it. If you look through many many different forums there is consistancy, people are stuck. It's always one little thing too (normally). I know I'm being vague and general, I apologize.
To reiterate MK-X point, people buy the kit can assemble and calibrate - that's easy compared to what comes next, but when it comes to software and firmware there are many different flavours and it's difficult to diagnose when there isn't really a good amount of feedback and error checking when the logic initializes the hardware. This is where the questions come, motors don't move, or wrong directions, endstops aren't stopping, what's my steps per rotation... on and on..... when a new feature is added like say auto-bed leveling, it doesn't work for everybody.
The disconnect is between people who can read the logic and people who can't.
There are ones and zero's, ha, see what I did there.... nevermind.
Better documentation is key, rather then just releasing a feature that is tied to a gcode command. Many people see that RepRaps as actually making 'things' and therefore it is seen as a finished product (the 3d printer), the clients I deal with simply have no understanding of what it takes to get up and running and to maintain a healthy machine. RepRaps are very much beta, late beta, but even then we are still in the infancy, and slowly trudging out with documentation but quick giving features that are innovative.
So, we are moving fast but get bogged down with lack of knowledge on how something works. So when it doesn't work the first time it's a slow process to get up to speed on a personal level.
I really hope that makes sense.......... need coffee.....
The main reason why it dont move enough fast is founds. Many people developing new solutions doesnt take from this any $. And there is second part of community that take from open source and sell those solutions and finally making money on inventors works. There is a lot of people who wanted to work on 3d printers and started to work for companies. When the work started be commercial they dont publish newest movements. So we didint go to much in last 6 years. Everything works that same we had only bed autoleveling its a only one milestone in reprap community
You do have a good point, it is also a fine line though. The open source community is just that though - open. So when somebody wants to find out about a certain subject matter it's probably the first thing that pops up. So it's easy to say that open source was first and the monetized later by somebody else. Unfortunately it's difficult to contribute full time to a open source project (for most of us, or I could just speak for myself). Still have to pay the bills, money that I would rather put into software development and hardware improvements.
And the community has the RepRap movement as a milestone, we are all here because of these milestones, and they are no small feat either. We should all be keeping this alive.
RepRap is still growing. It's crazy how many new people buy reprap kits each day, and you can only imagine how many more printers they are making for their friends daily as well. It's a movement, one that will have its ups and down, but in the end the open source aspect of RepRap will help 3D printers evolve. That is as long as companies don't come along and try and close off the open source by filing for patents and whatnot.
Reprap comes aout becouse the patents ended so there is no worry about patents. It will grow for couple years. Ithink reprap is the way to make 3d printing mainstream Becouse YOu build Yor printer some of Your friend see it and will want to have one. With Your experience the printrer will be build better and faster and going onQuote:
Originally Posted by WinceNWine
This conversation can actually go in two directions; Advancements in machine quality and capability, and advancements toward the reprap dream of self-replication.
On the self-replication front, progress has all but stopped. Initial progress was made by trying to reduce machined part counts. This was semi successful but not much has happened since then. Most people would rather build a printer that works well with prefab hardware than work towards self-replication. Any progress made in this area is mainly by companies working on metal printing technologies and multi material techniques. Once the technology is refined enough to print PCBs, then we will see drastic progress in my opinion.
On the machine quality and capability front, I think progress is steady. There will always be that desire to make your own printer better, and that will bring about occasional breakthroughs. But, like people have said above, there are several things limiting faster paced advancement. The largest one is cost in my opinion. Repraps are almost exclusively used by tinkerers and DIYers who use 3D printing as a hobby. With the minimum cost to build a printer around $500 ( just an estimate), that stacks up to be a fairly expensive hobby! Especially if someone was to do the experimenting, building, redesigning, rebuilding that is required for any substantial advancement and innovation. The more people that join the community the faster things will move but money will always be an issue for reprap progress.
documentation is also a point that I agree with but I won't restate what has been discussed above.
I think with regards to the self-replicating angle, there's not really anywhere for the research to go. The Mendel is sufficiently self-replicating for any practical application of the tech, and the GUS Simpson is about 80% printed parts, with no rails or threaded rods in the mix at all. Until there's a breakthrough in printing conductive material, there's going to be a limit to the kind of components that can be printed.
Actually, why don't I see more interest in the GUS Simpson? Is it just so new it hasn't caught on like the Deltas and Mendels?
Apparently there are issues with the printing geometry of the GUS Simpson.