RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Out of 10 Prints, only one was without problems. It didn't matter whether I had the spools without buffers or used them with buffers or auto rewinders. There was always something wrong. It was really annoying. That's why I really hope that Prusa continues to work on it.
I disagree, once it's hooked on and loaded up, it's actually very reliable......
How about a MMU4 /MMU One is build the way, you don´t need to tinker that much anymore.
Atm the only thing that makes the MMU3 a Prusa product is the name, but not the reliability or ease of use like Prusa printers.
It feels more like a cheap thirdparty addon and not a Prusa product at all to me.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
And what problems do you have on your mind? Because I have no problems at all with my multicolor prints. And lot of people have no problems. So It seems to me there are very few design flaws. But due to diversity of users and use cases there is always possibility to discover some minor flaws. MMU3 is known for its reliability.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
My MMU sometimes doesn't pull any filament. It doesn't matter how I set the pressure, even though the pinions look good.The filament often comes out in front of the extruder when threading it. I also straightened the path in front of the MMU with a printed part, but that didn't help either.I've read a lot that the reliability has increased a lot from the 2nd to the 3rd, which was also a reason for buying it. But mine just doesn't work. I think I'll wait to see what Prusa comes up with for the Core One and otherwise try this Ulti Mod. Maybe I'll have the parts printed in SLA too, for cleaner transitions
And what problems do you have on your mind? Because I have no problems at all with my multicolor prints. And lot of people have no problems. So It seems to me there are very few design flaws. But due to diversity of users and use cases there is always possibility to discover some minor flaws. MMU3 is known for its reliability.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Hi, I have not got Core one yet, but I have tried Coreboxx ( I have paid Premium version) with my MK4s. And it works great. So now I´m only waiting for my Core one kit...
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Like many of us, I have made my own version without buffer and taking advantage of the Polymaker Polydryer that I have: https://www.printables.com/model/1192508-spool-auto-rewinder-for-polydryer
Sorry for my poor English. I try to do my best.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Oh ok wow. Thats look like what we want 😀
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Option 2 all the way. I currently Have the MK4 with the Ikea lack enclosure and a mod to have buffer and spools mounted on the top of the enclosure. It's a rather odd looking solution but it saves a ton of space cutting down on the printers footprint. Maybe go a step further and allow a premium option to keep filament dry and clean with option 2? Was kind of bummed to see the core one option not too long after making my own enclosure. Seeing the possibility of top mounted spools on the core one has me interested in converting to the core one in the future! Having as many variables more or less controlled when printing means more time for creative endeavors and making! Keep pushing the industry forward as you guys always do. For now, I will be upgrading to MK4S soon.
RE:
I'm kinda torn between both solutions. I need to see how the new solution works before I commit.
My issue is placement - my printer is located in the corner, so both the rear and the right side are covered. At the moment I have my spools above, feeding into the prusa buffer, which is on the rear right side, but still easily reachable for when I change filaments etc, and it all seems to work nicely.
On occasion I do need to access the MMU3 when it comes to loading (sometimes filament gets stuck inside while loading), or for general servicing. My concern with option 1 is if the buffer is in the right side it will be less accessible for me.
Similarly with option 2, if the MMU3 is hidden towards the rear, I will have difficulty getting to it, if need be. So I may have to look at something else completely - a mix between placing the MMU3 on top of the printer, as in option 1, so its easily reachable, and keeping the spools on, or under, the adjustable shelf just above. Maybe I will move the buffer so it sits up here too - not sure yet. The buffer I don't need to access as often, as I only really use the MMU3 for light multicolor prints, or for single color prints (its nice having the filaments loaded already and just choosing which to use - call me lazy! lol).
Hence, I'm still reserving my thoughts until I see the final solution......
--> MK4 - MK4S - MINI+ - MMU3 - Accelerometer Guide - BambuLab A1 Combo <--
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Agree 100%. My son has the Bambo mini with AMS 4 color feed. He simply inserts the filament into the ptfe tube and printer does the rest. Prusa clearly has some catching up to do. Right now they are playing Bamboo’s game.
RE: option two
Just noticed that option 2 covers the vent holes perhaps requiring the swinging door to be left open for printing pla.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
As has already been mentioned here, the Corebox, with or without a case, might be an option. The buffer is located on the right of each spool.I'm still waiting to see what Prusa shows for the Core One, but the current plan would be to attach the MMU3 to the Core One and place the spool holder next to it. at least saves some space, the buffer is less fiddly than the Prusa buffer and you can get to the MMU quickly.
https://www.printables.com/model/1181433-mmu-spoolholder-with-in-built-filament-buffer-syst
https://www.printables.com/model/1178997-prusa-core-one-coreboxx-premium
And i found this MMU3 Mod. Not tested yet. But maybe it help one of you.
https://www.printables.com/model/1187340-improved-mmu3-idler
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
The Coreboxx premium is interesting, but the mmu3 on the back sucks. I would almost want taller and have it on the front. It won't work in the back for me. that buffer system is interesting.. I have been using the unofficial drybox with rewinders which have worked great. Also putting the MMU3 in the dry box means you can't add heat to the drybox. Lots to think about here.
RE:
Ya, thats the reason why i think i will use the spool holder of the coreboxx only.
Sander from Voxel3D tell me that the Core One with the Coreboxx on it, is around 90cm high.
He´s working on a drybox update for it.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Yup same here - having the MMU3 on the back doesn't work for me either. Although it's generally quite reliable, I still want to be able to get to it quick and easy for maintenance or servicing, or to fix the odd mis-feed error when loading.......
The Coreboxx premium is interesting, but the mmu3 on the back sucks. I would almost want taller and have it on the front. It won't work in the back for me. that buffer system is interesting.. I have been using the unofficial drybox with rewinders which have worked great. Also putting the MMU3 in the dry box means you can't add heat to the drybox. Lots to think about here.
--> MK4 - MK4S - MINI+ - MMU3 - Accelerometer Guide - BambuLab A1 Combo <--
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
option 2
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I agree. The Bambu and other knock-offs have shown that this is a better option to this day.
option 2
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I agree. The Bambu and other knock-offs have shown that this is a better option to this day.
Well, the Bambu mechanism is much simpler (cheaper, more compact) than Prusa's, even if Prusa manages to mount the spools in an enclosure and drive them backwards to take up slack, getting rid of the buffer. From what I understand there is no separate switch-over mechanism needed; the AMS spool rack drives the requested filament right to the extruder and retracts it when switching.
I am not sure why Prusa went with the separate switch mechanism close to the extruder. Yes, they manage to switch between filaments with less waste -- but I don't see why that should be fundamentally impossible with a Bambu-style AMS. Isn't it just a matter of where you cut the filament and where you place filament sensors?
So why not move the filament push/pull motors (one per filament spool) right into the spool holder box , have a filament cutter as close as possible to the hotend, and no bulky motor & switch unit riding on top of the printer? Is it an IP issue with Bambu or some other, earlier inventor?
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Concur. The fact is that although complex is more elegant, it can also be the enemy of success. It induces a higher risk of failure.
I agree. The Bambu and other knock-offs have shown that this is a better option to this day.
Well, the Bambu mechanism is much simpler (cheaper, more compact) than Prusa's, even if Prusa manages to mount the spools in an enclosure and drive them backwards to take up slack, getting rid of the buffer. From what I understand there is no separate switch-over mechanism needed; the AMS spool rack drives the requested filament right to the extruder and retracts it when switching.
I am not sure why Prusa went with the separate switch mechanism close to the extruder. Yes, they manage to switch between filaments with less waste -- but I don't see why that should be fundamentally impossible with a Bambu-style AMS. Isn't it just a matter of where you cut the filament and where you place filament sensors?
So why not move the filament push/pull motors (one per filament spool) right into the spool holder box , have a filament cutter as close as possible to the hotend, and no bulky motor & switch unit riding on top of the printer? Is it an IP issue with Bambu or some other, earlier inventor?
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
While I do agree, I'd prefer not to have any filament cutting at all. This is where wastage happens - its because of that cutting that the remaining filament in the nozzle (and leading to the nozzle) is purged and wasted. Whereas with the MMU3 since it pulls back the filament without cutting there is very little to purge, and the change itself is a lot quicker.
For me, it would be ideal to have an AMS style unit, but with the MMU3 filament pull back as well. So all the benefits of the simple and easy to use AMS, but the speed and less wastage of the MMU3!
--> MK4 - MK4S - MINI+ - MMU3 - Accelerometer Guide - BambuLab A1 Combo <--
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I think theres a way to make MMU3 integrated into the box and instead of mechanical switcher you can have some ptfe joint place. Then you only need to think of filament sensors and some cutter and/or pull filament from nozzle as mmu3 does. Still I think Prusa made this solution, because they support any source of filament - spools, rack of spools, separate boxes, etc...