RE: Update...(Kind of)
Why do you think INDX won’t be good for multi-material?
We got a h2d at work recently, the automation and useability is good, but im not very impressed by the print quality so far, at least with std profiles and bambu filament, my c1 would be slightly better in most cases. I was surprised to see some ringing for example. Maybe its like the c1 and there are some examples that are better than others.
I guess it's hit-or-miss. As you know, I am very meticulous about calibrating filaments across all my printers and nozzles.
On my C1, even after carefully tuning the belts and running the input-shaper calibration, I was still getting terrible ringing and ghosting with PC Blend. I was able to reduce it somewhat by drastically slowing down the max flow rate and perimeter speeds but then my print times shot up to double or triple. Since the parts I was printing were not only functional but also cosmetic, it was unacceptable. Matte and filled filaments will hide this but my particular projects (rockets) need to be very bright and glossy to make them easier to spot. I doubt the ringing affected performance but the esthetics bothered me.
Same parts on the H2D, I still have some ringing but it's not as noticeable and I really have to look for it. In general, the H2D most definitely outperforms the C1 with engineering filaments due no doubt to having active heating (and a 350° nozzle). There is also negligible skew in the XY plane as opposed to my C1 which has a -0.15° skew which I needed to compensate for. As for commodity filaments like PLA/PETG etc, I don't really notice much of a difference between the two.
However, the C1 does better with TPU and other flexibles like PEBA-Air. It is much easier to print them on a C1.
When the INDX is ready, it will be superior for multi-color for sure but less so for multi-material. I still don't see myself doing a lot of multi-color so the novelty might wear off quickly. Will see.
Prusa Core One
RE: Update...(Kind of)
I'm not to that point yet. I'm just happy they get off the pad without disintegration and the parachute deploys. There are folks in my club that are into competitions and spend days/weeks sanding, filling, sanding. If I get to that point I'll probably move to a less strenuous hobby like train spotting.
RE:
Why do you think INDX won’t be good for multi-material?
I was suggesting that the INDX offers no advantage over the H2D for multi-material. For most multi-material prints you only need 2 heads, one for primary and one for the interface/support. Also, with INDX and the now larger volume and still passively heated chamber, I anticipate that doing multi-material prints with ASA and PC (for example) will be harder to pull off on the Core One.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Any VFA or layer lines should increase drag because the application is not like a golf ball or shark skin. Usually you see more rocketry folks talk a lot about extremely smooth outer skin and the need to sometimes fill it with some sort of filler and sand the crap out of the body.
Yep, one guy spent weeks on this only to get a parachute failure and watch all that hard work hit the ground at 300 kph.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Surely controlled chemical smoothing would be a better/quicker approach than all that hard graft sanding and filling etc ?
RE: Update...(Kind of)
if you're gonna have failures like that, you need to fill it with potassium nitrate and sulphur to make sure it's a nice impact!!
RE: Update...(Kind of)
I think it will equally and likely superior. My rational is that you can have up to 4-8 materials versus just two with the H2D. I understand that you can have AMS, but they AMS is not as good for multi material as having 8 different hotends.
Why do you think INDX won’t be good for multi-material?
I was suggesting that the INDX offers no advantage over the H2D for multi-material. For most multi-material prints you only need 2 heads, one for primary and one for the interface/support. Also, with INDX and the now larger volume and still passively heated chamber, I anticipate that doing multi-material prints with ASA and PC (for example) will be harder to pull off on the Core One.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Surely controlled chemical smoothing would be a better/quicker approach than all that hard graft sanding and filling etc ?
that's a very interesting idea. Even if it didn't completely make the surface smooth, it would be smoother than it started out with and I bet you you could test that to figure out just exactly how much of a difference it makes.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Getting the parachute to open reliably can be a challenge for some.
Any VFA or layer lines should increase drag because the application is not like a golf ball or shark skin. Usually you see more rocketry folks talk a lot about extremely smooth outer skin and the need to sometimes fill it with some sort of filler and sand the crap out of the body.
Yep, one guy spent weeks on this only to get a parachute failure and watch all that hard work hit the ground at 300 kph.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Surely controlled chemical smoothing would be a better/quicker approach than all that hard graft sanding and filling etc ?
that's a very interesting idea. Even if it didn't completely make the surface smooth, it would be smoother than it started out with and I bet you you could test that to figure out just exactly how much of a difference it makes.
I've only ever attempted it once (with ASA and acetone), and the results were remarkable considering I had no idea what I was doing and basically just shoved the print in an airtight container with a small container full of acetone for a few minutes.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
What rockets are you building?
We got a h2d at work recently, the automation and useability is good, but im not very impressed by the print quality so far, at least with std profiles and bambu filament, my c1 would be slightly better in most cases. I was surprised to see some ringing for example. Maybe its like the c1 and there are some examples that are better than others.
I guess it's hit-or-miss. As you know, I am very meticulous about calibrating filaments across all my printers and nozzles.
On my C1, even after carefully tuning the belts and running the input-shaper calibration, I was still getting terrible ringing and ghosting with PC Blend. I was able to reduce it somewhat by drastically slowing down the max flow rate and perimeter speeds but then my print times shot up to double or triple. Since the parts I was printing were not only functional but also cosmetic, it was unacceptable. Matte and filled filaments will hide this but my particular projects (rockets) need to be very bright and glossy to make them easier to spot. I doubt the ringing affected performance but the esthetics bothered me.
Same parts on the H2D, I still have some ringing but it's not as noticeable and I really have to look for it. In general, the H2D most definitely outperforms the C1 with engineering filaments due no doubt to having active heating (and a 350° nozzle). There is also negligible skew in the XY plane as opposed to my C1 which has a -0.15° skew which I needed to compensate for. As for commodity filaments like PLA/PETG etc, I don't really notice much of a difference between the two.
However, the C1 does better with TPU and other flexibles like PEBA-Air. It is much easier to print them on a C1.
When the INDX is ready, it will be superior for multi-color for sure but less so for multi-material. I still don't see myself doing a lot of multi-color so the novelty might wear off quickly. Will see.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Update...(Kind of)
I think it will equally and likely superior. My rational is that you can have up to 4-8 materials versus just two with the H2D. I understand that you can have AMS, but they AMS is not as good for multi material as having 8 different hotends.
Why do you think INDX won’t be good for multi-material?
I was suggesting that the INDX offers no advantage over the H2D for multi-material. For most multi-material prints you only need 2 heads, one for primary and one for the interface/support. Also, with INDX and the now larger volume and still passively heated chamber, I anticipate that doing multi-material prints with ASA and PC (for example) will be harder to pull off on the Core One.
i've done things like ABS with ASA and so on on the H2 series without any problems. I rarely find a need to do more than 2 to 3 materials for anything and the biggest issue would be the ability to use different size nozzles for different materials. at the moment, I'm not so sure that either of the printers can do that… Use different sized nozzles when printing...
For the rocket application, this is interesting because it might be possible to print the walls with one material and the inside of the wall with a different material such as the carbon fiber reinforced material.
It might be useful to have one material in the exterior and another material on the interior and specifically when it comes to not wanting to refinish it, you might not want to use carbon fiber on the outside. Not really sure if that would cause more or less drag.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Acetone works really well with ABS and some ASAs
Surely controlled chemical smoothing would be a better/quicker approach than all that hard graft sanding and filling etc ?
that's a very interesting idea. Even if it didn't completely make the surface smooth, it would be smoother than it started out with and I bet you you could test that to figure out just exactly how much of a difference it makes.
I've only ever attempted it once (with ASA and acetone), and the results were remarkable considering I had no idea what I was doing and basically just shoved the print in an airtight container with a small container full of acetone for a few minutes.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE:
Surely controlled chemical smoothing would be a better/quicker approach than all that hard graft sanding and filling etc ?
Most of the hard core hobbiest (the level 3 rockets) use preformed fiberglass tubes.
The 3D printed rockets tend to be in the Level 1-2 category. Typical failure mode for these is having it split along the layer lines and come back to Earth in pieces. It's hard work just to drive the 2hrs to the launch area (for me), wait your turn and hope the rocket makes it back to earth in one piece. Then turn around and come home.
When I was a kid in the US we had Estes model rocket kits that were made with balsa wood and phenolic cardboard tubes. Some of the more advanced rockets could hit maybe 800-1000m. Typically it was more like 20-40m. We'd launch them only for them to get caught up in power lines on the way down or end up on a neighbor's roof. Fun part was they were cheap, you could buy one for a couple of dollars (back then) and assemble it in a couple of hours.
Anyway, I'm rapidly getting bored with this hobby (rockets) and will move on to the next. At the moment, 3D printing this: OpenFlexure Microscope
RE:
The club I joined has an online library of Fusion360 and OpenSCAD files that I've cobbled together. It's nothing fancy, just motor housing, fins, tube, separable nose-cone and nylon parachute. I'll create a separate thread and post some pics later.
What rockets are you building?
RE:
It might be useful to have one material in the exterior and another material on the interior and specifically when it comes to not wanting to refinish it, you might not want to use carbon fiber on the outside. Not really sure if that would cause more or less drag.
In theory, you could. Have to be careful with material choice since dissimilar polymers have a tendency not to want to stick to each other (exception is PEI). ABS/ASA would work for the outer shell and PC for the inner shell. You can then smooth it with acetone since PC is resistant (it will craze if you get carried away though). It guess it would have to be ASA since the rocket gets exposed to a lot of UV.
Hmmm... I might try this. Interesting idea. I expect it would be somewhat similar to fiberglass over phenolic tubing.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
Which club? I build and fly rockets as another hobby.
The club I joined has an online library of Fusion360 and OpenSCAD files that I've cobbled together. It's nothing fancy, just motor housing, fins, tube, separable nose-cone and nylon parachute. I'll create a separate thread and post some pics later.
What rockets are you building?
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Update...(Kind of)
My level three was a Nike Smoke that was 10 inches in diameter and 1/2 scale. Weighed 57 pounds at flight.
Surely controlled chemical smoothing would be a better/quicker approach than all that hard graft sanding and filling etc ?
Most of the hard core hobbiest (the level 3 rockets) use preformed fiberglass tubes.
The 3D printed rockets tend to be in the Level 1-2 category. Typical failure mode for these is having it split along the layer lines and come back to Earth in pieces. It's hard work just to drive the 2hrs to the launch area (for me), wait your turn and hope the rocket makes it back to earth in one piece. Then turn around and come home.
When I was a kid in the US we had Estes model rocket kits that were made with balsa wood and phenolic cardboard tubes. Some of the more advanced rockets could hit maybe 800-1000m. Typically it was more like 20-40m. We'd launch them only for them to get caught up in power lines on the way down or end up on a neighbor's roof. Fun part was they were cheap, you could buy one for a couple of dollars (back then) and assemble it in a couple of hours.
Anyway, I'm rapidly getting bored with this hobby (rockets) and will move on to the next. At the moment, 3D printing this: OpenFlexure Microscope
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE:
Which club? I build and fly rockets as another hobby.
Tripoli Central California https://tccrockets.com/v2/ is the launch site. Member of LUNAR (Livermore SAR branch)
Probably won’t get to fly anything until the fall due to fire risk etc.
RE: Update...(Kind of)
I am the prefect for Rocketry South Carolina.
Which club? I build and fly rockets as another hobby.
Tripoli Central California https://tccrockets.com/v2/ is the launch site. Member of LUNAR (Livermore SAR branch)
Probably won’t get to fly anything until the fall due to fire risk etc.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog