Does Radial 3D Printing Produce Smooth Models?
I created this crude sketch of my ideas for the Multi-Nozzle Radial 3D Printing process, but my lack of experience only produced more questions.
How does an experienced and more educated group address this possibility? Is it possible, or does it offer any benefit(s) for any type of 3D Printing project?
There was a kickstarter somebody posted about a few weeks back. The cons far outweigh any pros. In terms of smooth surfaces, there really is no reason an r/theta setup would be any smoother than an x/y. The surface finish is more associated with z height, system rigidty, and calibration calibration calibration…
That makes sense. Is it not possible to program output for continuous growth z? I was thinking that combining the Multi-Nozzle with continuous x-axis motion, would reduce Flux in temperature and provide for a more consistent layering. Thinking in terms of the helix…
I was also hoping that the continuous motion would reduce wear on mechanical parts. Do you have a link or title that I can use to find the Kickstarter project?
This kickstarter was one of the worst ideas in 3d printing I’ve seen yet. There’s some interesting stuff in your sketch, but all of it is unproven and unlikely to work as you imagine.
Cool. I really appreciate all your input.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2132002936/r-360-the-most-simple-and-modular-3d-printer?ref=live
How would one keep constant speed through a hard bend close to r=0 in a r/theta setup? Is it harder to spin 90° than to go full stop on one axis and accelerate to full speed on the other?
The high density of nozzles on the Nozzle Board would compensate for acute angle surface variance and void areas. (pure theory at this point)
@Hannes_Lilliefeldt it’s worse than that. Even for a straight line passing near r=0, the required speed of the rotational axis approaches infinity.
Ahhh… I see what you’re saying. I was making the assumption that you could cycle the flow of filament (on/off/on) similar to a standard ink jet printer, but I now see how that would potentially create more flaws in the final product. Hmmmmm… Is there a way to improve on the responsiveness of flow control?
I’m not an expert on this, but a fundamental issue seems to be that you still have to layer the parts to build them, and those layers have measurable thickness…so you’ll always have bad curvature with respect to the z-axis…
I’m not sure I understand curvature issue in reference to the z-axis. Can you explain what you mean?
Oh I just mean, in the xz and yz planes in 3d printers in general, where z is the axis of growth, there is always crappy curvature.
Are you talking about the striations created by the layering of material? If so, I agree. I tried to address that issue by monitoring and adjusting the temperature just before the material bonding point. Then again, I have no experience with the process…
So I just read on the MAKE magazine 3d printer issue that Stratasys has a current patent on fdm parts with invisible seams. So until that patent expires, I guess slicers must leave seams of some sort
Yeah Kirk, that’s what I meant. I wasn’t sure what parameters you could control to remediate that, so that’s cool to learn
@Eric_Moy if an open source software infringes on a patent, who can you sue?
Seems…that’s the word I needed…Not striations… Haha… I guess my head was stuck in geology mode. Sorry about that. Thanks Eric Moy.
@Shachar_Weis , not really sure, probably the author. In the last they’d get a cease and desist and have to remove the feature out. I’m not really all that worried as I like the seam, gives me a reference of layer progress
It seems like there would be a post print surface heating process, that would smooth out the visible seems. Has anyone tried something like that?
