Coping with different 3d printers

[rue_d_etropal]

Sticking my head out again.

After discussing some of the problems with printing using downloaded files, I think that it is time for the industry to either come up with standards so printers wil print file passing suitability tests like Shapeways ye, or for them to provide software that converts STL files to suit their particular printer. 

We take it for granted that when we are online that usually we can access most types of files, and if not there is something we can download for our particular computer. 

I am not particularly interested in doing the actual 3d printing, and like when I was in IT I only got involved in creating the programs and I was not expected to be able to operate or maintain the actual computer it was running on. So I do the design work and carry out various checks(and experience) and then pass on the STL file to someone who can then take it onto printing. 

 

 

[PhilH]

I might be missing the point here but isn’t that what slicing software does, ie convert .stl files into specific printer language.? I have 3 printers, one fdm and 2 resin, all requiring different format files, and once I tell my slicer program which machine I’m using it converts the .stl files into the required format for that machine to print.

edit There are also numerous free online file converters to convert myriad types into formats which my printers understand. I can also put .obj files directly into my (free) slicing program.

 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2023 by PhilH

[njee20]

You keep posting these threads. What is it that your to achieve? Are you still trying to justify why you think your designs are worth tens of thousands?

 

Why are you trying to specify how an industry works,  whilst at the same time saying you have no interest in actually understanding it?

 

There are literally dozens of validation tests out there to help people optimise their printers. It’s idiocy to suggest that you could ever specify specific parameters that every printer must adhere to.
 

The only conceivable thing you could do is specify if something is designed for FDM or resin, but until you actually print anything and learn about printing then your ‘guidance’ is completely useless. Given you won’t do this don’t expect an industry to accommodate you.  

[billbedford]

1 hour ago, rue_d_etropal said:

Sticking my head out again.

 

Yep

 

I suggest you take note of the first section of this video. It's about Sculteo, rather than Shapeways but it will give you an idea of what is happening to the wider AM Industry. And let's just say the bit you see here with hobbyists using cheap Chinese printers is a minuscule part of the whole industry. 

 

 

[John Isherwood]

1 hour ago, rue_d_etropal said:

Sticking my head out again.

After discussing some of the problems with printing using downloaded files, I think that it is time for the industry to either come up with standards so printers wil print file passing suitability tests like Shapeways ye, or for them to provide software that converts STL files to suit their particular printer. 

We take it for granted that when we are online that usually we can access most types of files, and if not there is something we can download for our particular computer. 

I am not particularly interested in doing the actual 3d printing, and like when I was in IT I only got involved in creating the programs and I was not expected to be able to operate or maintain the actual computer it was running on. So I do the design work and carry out various checks(and experience) and then pass on the STL file to someone who can then take it onto printing. 

 

 

 

3D printing, as I understand it, is still very much in the development stage. Progress in that development is a product of finding the optimum benefits of a number of different approaches.

 

No doubt, in time, the best of all methods will develop into an industry standard - but we are nowhere near being at that point at present.

 

You clearly would like to be able to sell your designs to modellers, who would be able to print them, or have them printed, by a standard method with totally predictable, guaranteed results , with no tedious input whatsoever from you.

 

Unfortunately, we ain't anywhere near being there yet - you were born to soon!

 

I'm afraid that your designs are a wholly theoretical product - completely unsaleable in their present form, and in the current stage of the development of 3D printing.

 

You seem to be unable to accept this fact, unpalatable as it may be.

 

Since I am the bearer of negative opinion, I think that it is relevant to comment on your railway history postings, too. I read them as lightweight precis or summary of the background to their subjects but, again, they are hardly original or definitive works.

 

You produce what are, in effect, the accumulated essential points of several seriously researched publications, in summary form.

 

As such, they are of passing interest - but in no way do they add to the already available information.

 

I'm afraid that, in common with your 3D designs, they suggest a self-indulgent, transient, cursory interest in a small sector of the railway hobby, that will not require you to sustain involvement once you have satisfied your own interest.

 

The foregoing is harsh - some will say unwarranted - but you have persisted in flogging this undeveloped horse against wiser advice, so I think that I may be excused for speaking as I find.

 

CJI.

[njee20]

I also think you’re trying to boil the ocean here. 
 

If you say “this has been printed on a *insert printer*” and have photos of that people will infer what they need to. Some may be prepared to try even if it looks like it may not work on their printer (eg you say it’s designed for/tested on resin and they have FDM). 
 

Because of your abject refusal to actually do that, you’re instead expecting every printer manufacturer to develop software to confirm whether your designs would work? Obviously that’s mental, and wholly unachievable. 

 

I’m afraid you seem not to understand the people you are trying to sell to, nor the market you are trying to enter. 

[billbedford]

1 hour ago, njee20 said:

If you say “this has been printed on a *insert printer*” and have photos of that people will infer what they need to. Some may be prepared to try even if it looks like it may not work on their printer (eg you say it’s designed for/tested on resin and they have FDM). 

 

The OP designs are just like that. They are designed for SLS and material jetting printers which have either powder or dissolvable supports, but are industrial machines with purchase costs in the £20k-100k range. 

[rue_d_etropal]

I have asked experienced 3d printers about this and they say it is a problem. I would have expected the industry to have come up with a some way to fix the problem. I wonder I the really want to do so.

And yes, I do keep on suggesting similar ideas. That is because noone is actually listening. 

 

 

[John Isherwood]

2 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

I have asked experienced 3d printers about this and they say it is a problem. I would have expected the industry to have come up with a some way to fix the problem. I wonder I the really want to do so.

And yes, I do keep on suggesting similar ideas. That is because noone is actually listening. 

 

 

 

Perhaps those who know more of the subject than you or I know that the industry is not yet at a stage of development when standards can be set down.

 

CJI.

[billbedford]

The standard file format for 3D printers has been STL since it was formulated in 1987. The problem is that there are multiple mechanisms* for printing with each type of machine needing different pre-processing before printing. 

 

*Wikipedia lists these:

 

Quote

3D printers build objects by solidifying (SLA, SLS, SHS, DMLS, EBM, DLP) or printing (3DP, MJM, FDM, FFF, PJP, MJS) one layer at a time. 

 

[Harlequin]

I suggested in one of the other threads that it would be possible to make a ready-supported print for a generic home resin printer that would work for most people. And further, that you could test that idea by giving such an STL away and collecting feedback.

 

Have you followed that idea up?

 

[amandalee]

Ive watched the discussions re selling or giving access to an stl of the item we have in many cases spent many hours creating, Ive spent 4 years getting to the point where I can achieve a reasonably good wagon using my 3 bedslingers, using filament. Ive downloaded and printed/ modified some of Iron Mink's excellent models too. I checked and was told no problems to sell a couple on which I have done. They are drawn full size and then re-scaled to suit, being meant for a resin printer I have had to get creative to print on my setup's here. Being a building designer with many Cad years behind me I find this tricky at times but not beyond me. The thought of having someone try to print 1 of my stl's without much more than a "slice n go approach" is kind of unrealistic. I draw how I do in my Cad of choice, all as acis solids using solid modelling, that gives a certain freedom but also restrictions im used to working around. Ive designed and printed every model, run them on my layout, and wouldn't dream of letting an untried or run tested model loose, especially in just stl format. While I can design and document a house in my day job, and know how it will go together and work, I would'nt expect someone who bought a 3d printer to just be able to slice n go. The 3 printers here all print slightly different, even for the same stl, im always tweaking and don't think that will change any time soon. Case in point I was asked to re-do my tank ramp wagon with it set for loading tanks, buffers folded back and with the 1 end removed. Easy as its my cad and I know what to do, 10 hours to date in between coffee and watching youtube so far. To send the stl's to someone they would need to do a few test prints then wonder why I drew how I did when their printer will go finer than mine, or is resin which is a whole different ball game. The concept of a "thingiverse" type repository for paid or free files more in our interest sounds good, the 1 we all go to has many good files, a lot of crap and ive whiled many an hour trying to get something to print or even just slice. I think were a bit far off that yet, Just my thought's going forward........            

[JCL]

7 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

And yes, I do keep on suggesting similar ideas. That is because noone is actually listening. 

 

 

I think you’ll find they are, but you don’t like the answers.

We’d all like to design something that will work for all printers, but as others have said, you are looking for a level of maturity in an industry that isn’t there yet. And unfortunately repeating that it should be so won’t make it so.

 

It reminds me of personal computers back in the late 80s, there were lots of operating systems out there, and none of them were compatible with each other. Over the next couple of decades most of them, like OS/2, BEOS, NextOS, etc, fell by the wayside until you now pretty much have Windows, Apple’s OS and various flavours of Linux. It all takes time. 
 

As someone said, if you’re interested in selling your designs, release a couple of models to people and get some free feedback, and then you’ll know for sure where the issues lie with them.

 

Also, go to YouTube, it’s not all hobbyists on there, some channels have industry news on them from time to time, so you can keep up with developments.

[njee20]

7 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

I have asked experienced 3d printers about this and they say it is a problem. I would have expected the industry to have come up with a some way to fix the problem. I wonder I the really want to do so.

And yes, I do keep on suggesting similar ideas. That is because noone is actually listening. 

 

 

People are listening, but they’re also telling you that your ideas are wrong/impractical. Are you still planning to distribute these STLs by CD…?

 

To reiterate, to ensure I understand the ‘problem’, you want all printers to commit to a set of standards (wall thickness, wire diameter, unsupported distance), so that you could guarantee your designs would print on any printer?
 

That would entirely kill innovation, because you’d simply have a lowest common denominator. Everything must print on an ancient printer, so why strive to make things better?

or do you mean calibration prints? Because they exist in spades. XP2 validation test, AmeraLabs, TableFlip Foundry Cones of Calibration.

 

Slicing software already makes an output printer specific, but there are simply too many variables to be able to include a binary “this will/won’t print”. 
 

I have seven different models of printer, and have sold thousands of printed parts. If you’d like to have a quick Zoom call to discuss what you really mean I’m totally happy to do that. As it is clearly there’s just frustration on both sides. You feel you’re not listened to, everyone else feels like they’re banging their head against a brick wall because you appear to have such a fundamental lack of understanding of what is actually entailed. 

 

 

 

The OP designs are just like that. They are designed for SLS and material jetting printers which have either powder or dissolvable supports, but are industrial machines with purchase costs in the £20k-100k range. 

Bit generous, the OP has designs which meet Shapeways’ design parameters, but he’s not actually tested them. In the absence of any desire to do so I can see why a global set of standards would be appealing, but of course it’s just wholly impractical.
 

[chuffinghell]

Are you wanting to sell just the stl file for someone to print themselves on their own printer?

 

I would have thought someone with their own printer would already know how to slice the model to suit their own printer……or am I missing the point?….if I am my apologies

 

 

Edited October 25, 2023 by chuffinghell

[billbedford]

His real problem is that there aren't enough punters to make his dreams of  riches come pass. 

[njee20]

 

21 minutes ago, chuffinghell said:

Are you wanting to sell just the stl file for someone to print themselves on their own printer?

 

I would have thought someone with their own printer would already know how to slice the model to suit their own printer……or am I missing the point?….if I am my apologies

 

 

You’ve missed the myriad threads to date. The OP has a huge volume of designs, presently sold through Shapeways. He has no interest in actually printing anything (which is fine), so they’ve overwhelmingly untested, but of course within Shapeways stringent parameters this is a fairly safe bet. Now he wants to sell STLs, but essentially wants people to have an assurance that his entirely untested designs will always work. Hence he wants every printer to have a set of standards he can adhere to as an assurance that they’ll work.
 

He has valued his library of STLs at £100k, and is attempting to realise this without learning anything about 3D printing. 
 

There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of that, but it makes for frustrating threads.

[chuffinghell]

I don’t like the idea of selling just the design especially after all the work that goes into them

 

I prefer to sell the finished print as and when required but it certainly ain’t going to make me a millionaire…..

 

 

….mainly because I spend a lot of time removing the supports so the buyer doesn’t have too (because it’s a pain in the a***)….

 

….and I only sell them to cover the materials and printing costs and it all goes back into the hobby*

 

 

*it’s a terrible business model 🤣

 

Edited October 25, 2023 by chuffinghell

[Harlequin]

I think that current domestic 3D resin printers are more homogeneous than people think and that it would be possible to set some design parameters that cover a large number of common domestic devices, design for that target spec, state what the parameters are when distributing an STL and for it to give good results on printers that fall within those parameters. Orientation and supports require some expertise but they would be part of the STL - not something the customer would be expected to do. The customer would only have to slice the STL, using the default settings for his/her printer.

 

Ordinary domestic printers can do great things, as @chuffinghell shows above. Some friends and I made the CAD for this yard crane which I printed on my 3 year old printer:

 

Edited October 25, 2023 by Harlequin

[njee20]

Yes, I agree, and I think most printer owners understand that. Let’s be honest there are few items that would genuinely only print on certain printers. Even comparing an OG Mars/Photon to a current model it’ll be crisper, of course, and maybe some detail won’t print on the older printers, but it’s not that bad.
 

Hence my suggestion the OP simply has a photo of an item printed on a certain printer and says “printed on X printer”, leaving people to decide if they’re happy their printer will match that. 

Edited October 25, 2023 by njee20

[chuffinghell]

I upgraded* from an Anycubic Mono X2 to an Elegoo Saturn 8K

 

I used the same sliced file but just saved it in the format required for the different printer without any issues
 

*debatable

[njee20]

Yep, I don’t design for different printers, I just accept that some things will come out better with finer resolution.

[chuffinghell]

1 minute ago, njee20 said:

Yep, I don’t design for different printers, I just accept that some things will come out better with finer resolution.

Or finer sandpaper 🤪

[JCL]

I think really, the main things that come out differently on my FDM and resin printers are thin parts. For example, I can get away with thinner window frames on the resin printer than I can on the Ender.

[NScaleNotes]

On 25/10/2023 at 20:00, Harlequin said:

I think that current domestic 3D resin printers are more homogeneous than people think and that it would be possible to set some design parameters that cover a large number of common domestic devices, design for that target spec, state what the parameters are when distributing an STL and for it to give good results on printers that fall within those parameters. Orientation and supports require some expertise but they would be part of the STL - not something the customer would be expected to do. The customer would only have to slice the STL, using the default settings for his/her printer.

 

Ordinary domestic printers can do great things, as @chuffinghell shows above. Some friends and I made the CAD for this yard crane which I printed on my 3 year old printer:

 

 

I know most of the internals of most 3D printers actually come out of the same factory but was wondering about this because @JimFin posted a video about orientation of 3D prints on another RMWeb thread a little while ago which made it seem a little more complicated than X degrees is the best.

Here's the link: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/181985-dodgy-resin-3d-print/?do=findComment&comment=5307999

 

With a variety of LCD sizes now available in consumer machines I wonder if it is actually getting a little more difficult to provide generic advice.

 

Edited October 27, 2023 by NScaleNotes
Added link to thread.