Thanks for this video! SLS now for the flat at home, not a wardrobe sized model. Not bad at all. But did you see the price on the shopping list?
1 Like
Well, below the Video they note 2999 USD. The price is also mentioned in the video. This looks so damn good and cheap, can it really be true? Ok 2999 isn’t cheap but when I throw it into the scale of an FDM printer, the FDM flies out of the scale with a sonic boom… In such cases and if there is really something to it, my wallet will get open quickly and far. Luckily they weren’t on sale today, luckily because I would have gotten so weak and ordered one straight away… For me the 3000 goes into the same category as the 300 for my M5 - don’t look into the mouth of a gift horse…
Have you ever looked at the FLASHFORGE GUIDER 3 ULTRA? Installation space size … and up to 500mm/s…
With micronics, think of the construction volume: 160 x 160 x 203 mm
The Flashforge is not in the same category. SLS printers bring a completely new level of prototyping. The closest thing to this is the Formlab Fuse 1 ($30,000) or a Sinterit Lisa X ($24,000). The Formlab and Sinterit will likely be better machines, but this entry point cracks the door open to something special. Nearly uniform strength (X/Y and Z strength), unrecognizable layer lines, and material choices that are unavailable to FDM.
Build size on the SLS side of things are pretty small, and the size of this machine is the biggest reason they can hit sub enterprise price points. And note, the $24k printer only has a build size of 130 x 170 x 330 and the $30k one is 145 × 145 × 193, making the 160 x 160 x 203 look downright like a deal.
1 Like
Well so out of the top of my head the prices there are 6000 USD and the construction volume is 300 x 300 x 600 (not 160x160). 2 independent extruders, Manufacturer’s warranty over 10,000 running hours and so on - but things will get interesting when Flashfroge’s technology comes into home use to the cheaper printers. Ultra is Interesting, but not for me.
SLS is a weapon with which you can tackle things that you will never be able to achieve with FDM - SLS these things normaly start at somewere around 20,000 USD plus. How do they get from $20,000 down to $3,000?
I did not claim that. The one from micronics is 160 x 160 x 203. I only mentioned Flashforge because I found it and it’s not uninteresting.
@just4memike
I am aware of the difference, which is why there was a paragraph in the text. Hank pointed out that there are better printers and gave an example. In this regard, I only brought the Flashforge into play. I apologise if I have confused you!
The size is an essential criterion for me. I rarely manage with such small installation spaces. Rather 250mm x 250mm x 240mm are still too small. Unfortunately, even a more favourable cost/space ratio is not much use to me if the installation spaces are still too small for most of my projects.
Ah ok - then I don`t got you. Yes i also check the Ultra and it was not uninteressting. Just think that a lot will happen in this area this year. Thanks for pointing out 160 x 160 x 203 - I didn’t have that yet.
My problem is that I always have to calculate with 2 printers (process reliability) 2 x 6000 USD = 12,000 USD and that cannot be achieved and is in my use case out of reachand - has to go to a service provider. Some backup via 2-3 FDM printers for what is burning is ok and pay off quickly.
Do 2 Ultras really generate $8000 more income than two Phrozen? Well, that has to be decided on a case-by-case basis. There is definitely more than one right answer. I’m not expecting Bambulab at the moment. They’ll come up with something else, but I’ll take a look at it when it’s there. They are at the moment with there actions simply too far away from my problems… The P1P and P1S were still acceptable, with respect on social motives, but now they have drifted into nowhere.
FYI, to anyone thinking about the Innovatefil TPU CF, it worked fine in the AMS, but the TDS’s Shore D rating was definitely optimistic. I measured 55D with a 6mm full dense test part. For reference, ABS measured 70D.
That said it’s a cool filament. Surprisingly, it’s the first TPU I’ve used that doesn’t stretch laterally very well but bends fine. It’s also the first TPU that is actually sand-able.
One thing to be aware of is its abrasive nature. If you use it enough, I can see often PTFE tube and feeder changes.
2 Likes
I can confirm that Extrudr 58D TPU works flawlessly on AMS with no mods. However, I am not sure about their 98A as I have not tested.
1 Like
That video was my inspiration to do so as mentioned in another post, but when I found this post, it seemed to get more attention, so I postest the results here, totally forgetting to mention that video.
Hey @5280, sorry I didn’t come back to this topic earlier, I wasn’t notified of any new messages, probably because no one answered to my post directly of mentioned me with an “@”.
But here I am… again. Haven’t tried anything new so far. 4 spool of TPU sitting on the shelf since several more unsatisfactory attempts.
The path like mentioned in my post is definitely one of the culprits here - I don’t even think the filament merger tension is an issue, as (even though its spring is very strong) the filament (if grabbed) should pull through. I think that the filament is not grabbed and therefore kings up (more easily) due to the wide paths.
I have been printing TPU on my X1C and P1S using the AMS, I get it from 3D Printing USA. I have used both their standard line and ‘similar to sainsmart’ line. They advertise both of them as being 90A, but so far I havent had many issues. I have had two jams out of around 5 or 6 rolls worth of TPU in various colors I have put through the machine. I didn’t have to do anything fancy, and I am also using the capricorn tubing. They also have a soft PLA line which is sort of a medium softness, I would put it between TPU and PETG in terms of flexibility, but it is really really easy to print on any bowden machines (or AMS in this case).
1 Like
I think this is because you have to tell the AMS it’s something hard to get it to load it. Therefore it tries too hard and jerks it. If it KNEW it was a soft material, as it does when printing, it treats it better - i.e. slower & lower jerk loading/unloading routines.
I saw in another post/thread someone mention when they unplugged the filament odometer, things run in sync. Obviously that could be done is software (if the AMS would ‘accept’ TPU you could have specialized handling)… But it’s something to think about. I’d unplug the odometer for TPU prints, put a switch on it externally.
Some openness on what the limitations are preventing BBL from (re)supporting merely the LOADING of TPU on the AMS would really help the community tackle the problem.
It seems like with a couple simple tools (like “advanced mode” which allows you to load TPU in the AMS), many of the other issues could be addressed.
From the bit of reading I’ve done, shutting off the filament odometer and synchronizing the two motors would go a long way towards making harder TPU’s operate reliably.
Similarly for loading/unloading, jams are most often seen (exclusively seen) on stopped and canceled prints where the printer/ams stop gentle loads/unloads and kink the filament.
Has anyone seen this model by chemape?
It says it’s able to print tpu from the ams
The machine has a filament buffer that the AMS plugs into on the back…I’m thinking, buy a 2nd Bambu filament buffer, and run a longer Bowden tube outside of the AMS to that 2nd buffer, then back into the AMS main feed gear
I think it works with the bowden setup because its being pulled vs pushed from an ams. Also, you can make the ams try to run tpu by tricking it. Make a pla profile with all tpu settings.
Hi, have you heard something from GitHub?
Nope. The fine guys at BL doesn’t seem to care much about user requests on GitHub - not even bugs.
1 Like