3 ms·

not completely true, as there are more variables at play. 0.1mm vs 0.2mm is the layer height, but you are missing the extrusion width settings. For all you kn

by Vendan 12y ago

not completely true, as there are more variables at play. 0.1mm vs 0.2mm is the layer height, but you are missing the extrusion width settings. For all you know, the $22,000 was running twice the extrusion width. In addition, just cause a printer was run at 0.2mm doesn't mean that's the smallest layer height it can do, I would expect the printrbot metal to do at least 0.1mm, if not better.

brudgers 12y ago
The filiment could have been wider as you suggest. The filiment on the $600 printer could have been wider too. My internet connection to the omniscience is down. I was just going with what's described in the article. There's a reason that the $22,000 model costs $22,000. Margin is only one of them.
- Vendan 12y ago
  Not the filament itself, the extrusion width. It's something that you specify in the slicer, and can vary by a bit, between hard bounds specified by the nozzle diameter of the print head. Also, consider how much of that $22,000 is "make it look pretty". They are already trying to do everything they can to make money off the thing, i.e. expensive filament and disposable build plates.
  - brudgers 12y ago
    If a part effectively takes a calendar day to print, the build plate increases the odds of an acceptable prototype 0.1%, and net revenue on the completed project will be $5001 per day, then a $5 build plate pays for itself in a properly capitalized design development cycle. And that's only the case if other features of the system don't add any value that could offset the cost of the plate and the additional day of design labor and overhead is ignored. All of which is to propose the possibility that there might be business cases where the machine makes sense and the possibility that everyone besides we two obvious geniuses might not be incompetent.
crisnoble 12y ago
Considering the $350 printrbot simple can do 100microns, I am sure that the printrbot metal can do 0.1mm too.

by Vendan 12y ago

brudgers 12y ago

The filiment could have been wider as you suggest. The filiment on the $600 printer could have been wider too. My internet connection to the omniscience is down. I was just going with what's described in the article. There's a reason that the $22,000 model costs $22,000. Margin is only one of them.

Vendan 12y ago
Not the filament itself, the extrusion width. It's something that you specify in the slicer, and can vary by a bit, between hard bounds specified by the nozzle diameter of the print head. Also, consider how much of that $22,000 is "make it look pretty". They are already trying to do everything they can to make money off the thing, i.e. expensive filament and disposable build plates.
- brudgers 12y ago
  If a part effectively takes a calendar day to print, the build plate increases the odds of an acceptable prototype 0.1%, and net revenue on the completed project will be $5001 per day, then a $5 build plate pays for itself in a properly capitalized design development cycle. And that's only the case if other features of the system don't add any value that could offset the cost of the plate and the additional day of design labor and overhead is ignored. All of which is to propose the possibility that there might be business cases where the machine makes sense and the possibility that everyone besides we two obvious geniuses might not be incompetent.

crisnoble 12y ago

Considering the $350 printrbot simple can do 100microns, I am sure that the printrbot metal can do 0.1mm too.