Just a quick update to say the design files, source files and other info are now (finally) up on Youmagine (and GitHub) - Yay!
Yet another 'FreeD' RepRap Printer for you to play with :)
Sli3DR, originally discussed here, (wow! was that really back in July, sorry for the delay, time is going fast) - files are now posted up on Youmagine Here
Do also take a look at the images on Youmagine to see how to build one, most of the fittings are M3 and M4.
You will need some 20mm Alu extrusions - (sizes on Youmagine) and some M4 V groove bearings (eBay)
I have added Repetier Firmware for it up on my GitHub here
It's also as a RAR archive on the Sli3DR Youmagine page
Firmware is setup and running for RAMPS 1.4
You can configure Repetier Firmware for other Hardware using the fancy online tool here - Load the Config.json file.
This time, I didn't do a Marlin release for it, if you make one, let me know or just share it.
I hope you build one, the print results I have had from it are outstanding.
0.2mm Layers - Really great Z -layer registration - finally as good as my Delta's - My quest for the perfect Cartesian Z axis is complete... for now.
This Design is part of the RichRap Sli3DR 3D Printer (A RepRap project)
Thank you for downloading, please be aware and abide by the license all these files.
The RichRap Sli3DR 3D Printer uses an Attribution - ShareAlike Creative Commons V3 (CC BY-SA 3.0) - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
This License is not greatly restrictive at all, so please don't forget to attribute my work and acknowledge.
If you decide to print and sell these or make further changes, improvements or additions, that's great! I want you to do that !
I hope this work has been of some use to you, if you wish to say hello or donate towards further developments please see my Blog here - www.richrap.blogspot.com
Many thanks - Richard Horne (RichRap)
Please feel free to contact me.
My website - www.richrap.com
Catch me on Twitter @RichRap3D
Watch me on YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/user/RichRap2011
Google+ https://plus.google.com/+RichardHorne_RichRap3D/about
Please see www.reprap.org for information about the RepRap Project.
Please visit the RepRap forum - http://forums.reprap.org/
These files were originally shared on - https://www.youmagine.com/
Please support this growing and open community.
Sli3DR What? - Reminder what Sli3DR is -
Sli3DR - (pronounced Slider) Sli3DR is not a Delta based printer, rather it's based on an intriguing 'unnamed mechanism' that was floating around on the RepRap Forum and G+ last year. Billy ZelsnackIdentified it as used in a very old (Rikadenki) Pen Plotter design here. A few people have tried it out for 3D printing using off the shelf mechanical parts, I wanted to make it with 3D printed parts and Spectra Line based on this mechanism.
Edit - This bit's updated for correct back credit of bringing the mechanism to the attention of the RepRap and 3D printing community - David Moorhouse over on G+ showed a cable bot design 1st November 2013, see here -https://plus.google.com/104904818050178236499/posts/WpzzVuULM2z
David's original video sparked great discussion over the mechanism, Tim RastallMade a great sketch of the 'unnamed mechanism' - still unnamed as far as I know.
Hopefully the 3D model of the entire machine in Sketchup will help you understand it, if you decide to build one questions are best asked over on the Youmagine Sli3DR comments page here
Happy Building, and as always let me know if you build one... or thousands.
And a quick grumble about backing up files - I had a hard drive crash last night, and like all disasters with computers it wasted a lot of time trying to restore things. I'm not yet sure how much was lost, most was backed up, but the last 3 months - not so much. I do already know I lost half of the 3DRnano V2 design I was working on a few months back. That caused much swearing and grumpy kicking of things.
Instead of getting too annoyed, I managed to finally release Sli3DR, so at least that's made me happy again. - If you do nothing else tonight, back up your projects to a memory stick, or on-line.
I will be releasing 3DRmega next, (as soon as possible) stay tuned.
I'm all for defence and debate, it made me document a few more things below on this topic -
I'm not 100% sure if the poster Dragons_Blood and Eddy Kay on G+ are the same person? feel free to let me know, I would be happy to discuss this further if needed.
I just had to reply on this, here on my blog - The points and my reply in blue to them below -
From the points on 3DPrintboard.com -
Dragons_Blood -“I
just wanted to let my voice be heard. I'm not a huge fan of Makerbot but I don
think that what they are doing is not exactly their fault.”
RH - Who’s fault is it? Is someone holding a 3D printed gut to
their heads? Using a broken system is not an excuse.
“Makerbot has 2 choices here. Either patent these
designs which aren't already patented, or allow another company to do so. “
RH - Other choices include, releasing the exact same documentation
you use for the patent out into the public domain as Prior Art, and then happily
manufacture these designs. This can be done directly or by allowing the Patent
application to lapse, then it becomes Prior art and no one can then patent, but
anyone can use the idea / method.
“If
another company patents these designs, then they can prohibit Makerbot from
ever using them on any of their future 3d printers. However, if Makerbot
patents them, they ensure that another competitor (i.e. 3d systems with cubify)
doesn't patent it and hold them out of the market.“
RH - See above about
public domain and prior art.
-
Most of the open-source and maker community is not concerned about companies fighting
over patents, infringements and IP, that’s their choice for constantly going
down that route.
-
What would have made all the difference is if Makerbot made a statement saying
they will not go after anyone in the open-source community, or designers where
inspiration for these types of ideas also appeared. The fact they have patented
so many interesting aspects of Home 3D printing that are also being developed
in the open-source community and that they have not engaged at all with that
community on this aspect, means they want ownership of patents covering these
things, and they didn’t want to highlight what they were doing ‘in the
background’. Many companies face this ‘big business problem’ that’s fine – it’s
clear that Makerbot is not going to stop down that route, they have stated many
times now “we need strong patents” – the concern is over what they intend to do
with them and that they have not been open with an open-source community they
once held closely at the heart of their business model.
-Over on Google+ if you search you will find an this post from Jan Wildeboer who claims he offered to assist Bre
Pettis (Makerbot) over a year ago with similar type of promise to the ‘community’
– I find it a real missed opportunity that was not taken up or used as a guide
for a similar statement from Makerbot – if it had, this would not have caused
such a bad feeling of betrayal and brocken trust within the open-source/RepRap community
and Makerbot’s patents. Jan's G+ Post - "Dear +MakerBot , here's an idea for you to ponder. Take a look at http://www.redhat.com/footer/patent-promise.html The Red Hat Patent Promise. To put it in simple terms, we at Red Hat apply for patents, mostly out of defensive reasons in a world of patent trolls. But we are fully aware that we must defend the freedom of Open Source and Open Innovation. So we have the legally binding promise that we will never use our patents against developers of Open Source software. It's not the perfect solution, but it is definitely better than your current approach of filing patents and not declaring what the community can do or NOT do. A year ago I offered +bre pettis my help in working on a similar approach for Makerbot, this however never happened. I am still ready to help and hook you guys up with my network. I think you could have avoided a lot of negative vibes with a patent promise in the Red Hat style."
-Pledges like the RedHat Patent promise not to go after
open-source contributors to a project / technology are already being used by
companies that need to have strong patents for legal defence, but also do not
want to alienate a community that supports them and can often lead to ideas
worth patenting.
-Without this sort of statement, what are people to think? How
will Makerbot use their power and Patent arsenal? For or against an open source
community or open-source company? Who knows, but waiting to see is going to be
too late.
}
“If that were to happen, it would be very difficult
for MakerBot to do anything about it.“
RH
- Companies design around patents all the time, and produce more innovative products
in the process, also producing more IP that can then be opened up or kept
secret, whatever works for you.
“I highly doubt that Makerbot plans to use these
patents to profit off of, or keep anyone from entering the market. They are
doing it simply to protect their ability to use these currently unpatented
designs in the future. “
RH - Why would you assume that? One of the only reasons to
have a patent it to get some leverage from it, by making someone else afraid to
go near your patented method in-case they say you infringe. Or to attack
someone (a competitor doing quite well in the market, but not well enough to defend a
big legal battle). And then also to have a patent armoury as a final card to
play if someone comes after you.
“Right
now they are all free to use, since there are no patents on them. However, if
Cubify (3d systems) came along and patented them, they could hold MakerBot ransom.
“
RH - Ransom, Threat, Stalemate, stand-off, war, stranglehold, limiting innovation that's what patents have come to stand for. You can decide to patent almost anything, if you have enough
money and think it will benefit you.
“Sure
Makerbot could go to the courts and say that these designs were created by
someone else but then that other person may be required to either patent the
design or allow someone else to. They would be stuck in a catch 22, where the
patent would either belong to the company that filed the patent, or the
original filer, who may not even wish to file a patent for the design.“
RH - The Patent
system was supposed to stop things in the public domain being patented in the
first place; the scenario above will always appear if companies decide to
gather as many patents in an area as possible with the intention of patent litigation
in the future.
Most patents are
vague for the very reason of letting some later process in the courts or by
expert testimony win over an infringement claim, or so simply sink the other
party in legal debt before the case is finished.
“I think Makerbot is getting too much heat for just
protecting their future business model. Until we see them actually sue someone
for using these designs, I think we should let them be.”
RH
- It’s too late once they sue a growing open source company - who will already
be on their radar - like Printrbot, Ultimaker or RepRapPro for Patent infringement,
what they could have done is make a Patent promise not to go after these types
of open-source companies in a similar way to how Red-Hat handled their growth.
That’s the true missed opportunity to unite a now big company like Makerbot with
an entire (and very smart) community to forge trust, rather than shatter and divide it.
RH
- That takes true vision and courage, Bre Pettis could have pulled it off if
that’s what he wanted to achieve with Makerbot and the wider 3D Printing
community. That’s what I'm personally disappointed about.
Other posts have appeared over the last week on the Makerbot Patent/trust storm, including some high-profile sites shining a big spotlight on the debate. Cory Doctorow Posted over on BoingBoing - It's way more balanced than many posts on this subject and raises some fair points for debate, unfortunately I think we have seen the direction Makerbot has decided to take, so we may never see them reach out to build back any trust with the Open source community. And as Cory states, head over to Adafruit to buy a LulzBot TAZ 4 open-source #RepRap 3D Printer
Even Adafruit themselves do not seem to be able to decide if they want to stock Makerbot/Stratasys products. John Biggs on TechCrunch posted The Next Open Source Battle Is Being Waged In The 3D Printing Industry John does mentions Red Hat, but unfortunately not the point about a patent promise I talked about above. Makerbot finally released a statement, (here on TechCrunch) it's bland sees right past the issues of trust and duplicity with the 3D printing community. The arguments could easily rage on back and forth, If Makerbot only want to focus on the Quick-Release Extruder - Members of the community have highlighted extruder designs that have the bistable spring implementation posted to Thingiverse as early as 2011 http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:7129"by MiseryBot, published Mar 19, 2011" Not quite as "slick" but it does have that key "bistable" bit. Makerbot, I feel you are now on your own.
Plenty of other comments and views are also being aired all over on various forum's and blogs,
Something is leaving a bad smell in the Open source community, could it be the recent Patents of big cheese Bre at Makerbot.
It's always very sad when you see a company or group turn their back on whatever community or project that helped make them successful.
Makerbot seem to be traveling down a darker and darker road as time goes on. I'm not sure if they felt invincible or that no one would notice but a recent patent frenzy by Makerbot has angered the open source 3D printing community. And we don't yet know what more is to come.
I prefer to use this blog to document work and talk about good things, so this is really a summary of past and recent events and links for you to find out more and make your own mind up about Makerbot's actions and community reaction to these disappointing and Machiavellian maneuvers.
And before we go on, I am not against Patents, they can be used for good to protect ideas and costly investments into research, that for some is a necessity to fuel sales and marketing of a product or invention. I don't think they are very fair and certainly not appropriate in many (most) cases, but they are not going away any time soon. For this trade off of hard work you can exploit an idea under a patent for a set period whilst also disclosing information about the invention and use.
Yes, RepRap and many open-source developments were built on expired patents. That's how it's supposed to work. A company gets 25 years to exploit it's patented invention, if after that time the market demand is still there and competitors can build a better mouse trap, then competition usually kick-starts another industry cycle and one could argue the original patented idea was not exploited well enough or the market was not satisfied with just one source of mouse trap.
What angers individuals is when ideas and developments that were in the public domain, very often with a specific open-source license are taken and patented by a company so others automatically now infringe. (or could be accused to infringe).
Patent trolling or this is abuse of the patent system is about as insulting as you can get to a community that encourages open innovation and sharing of open source developments.
Companies that can afford to mop-up open innovation into hundreds of patents, loosely based on ideas common in an industry or sector often have the power to legally threaten anyone that becomes a competitor. Using this abuse of the patent system can tie up smaller companies and stop new developments from even starting due to this sword of damocles handing over head.
Many things are just not worth patenting for companies or individuals, due to the cost and return possible along with the ability to be able to defend your patent if required. But if these seemingly insignificant ideas are patented by bigger companies who can afford the process, as a way to expand their patent portfolio, even if they were not 'invented' they take on another form of power.
Makerbot did 'invent' and patent an automated build platform, this was a commercial failure and proves the point not all ideas are worth patenting. Also the idea of an automatic build platform was openly discussed by various people when I first joined RepRap, long before the Makerbot patent, the difference here being that no one found it useful, practical or in any way essential, so the news Makerbot patented it was just not such of an issue.
Recent turbulent Thingiverse/Makerbot history -
Back in September 2012 changes to the Thingiverse Terms of Service along with various concerns that Makerbot was moving away from it's RepRap and Opensource roots led to an Occupy Thingiverse campaign.
This was exactly what Thingiverse looked like on 20th September 2012 -
It was the Same day Thingiverse decided to promote and feature my 3-way colour mixing extruder. (And it had already been on Thingiverse and my Blog for 28+ days before this) - See image below 'Created by RichRap 28 days ago'
Along with my 3-way multi-input material extruder above, I also posted, documented and shared my simple solution using lengths of different materials to produce multi-coloured objects - that was back in June2011.
Makerbot want to patent various things to do with multicolour and multi-matrial mixing, much of which has been done and documented in the open source community (Even directly at Bath University - UK as early as Feb 2012 and mentioned on the RepRap Blog June 2012 - Myles corbett report) This, over the last few years and is a very active area of open-source 3D printer development for myself and many others.
Plenty of other patent applications are also being submitted, we can only see the ones that have been published, so who knows what other things are in the pipeline...
Title - BUILD MATERIAL SWITCHING Abstract - A three-dimensional printer uses transitional lengths of build material to facilitate changes from one color to another during a fabrication process, and more generally to achieve multi-color objects corresponding to color patterns on the surface of a three-dimensional model. The transitional lengths of build material may be positioned inside a fabricated object, such as for infill, or outside the fabricated object where undesirable aesthetic properties of the transitional lengths will not impact the desired distribution of colors on the surface of the fabricated object.
Title - COLOR SWITCHING FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING Abstract - By reversing the direction of a first build material fed into an extruder, the first build material can be wholly or partially evacuated from the extruder before a second material is introduced. This approach mitigates transition artifacts and permits faster, more complete changes from one build material to another.
OpenbeamUSA has one of the best overviews of recent Makerbot patent troubles, it's well worth a read, and I don't need to repeat things here - Stay classy, Makerbot This also contains the details of how you can file a prior art application to help block a patent that is based on someone else's work or in the public domain.
Please discuss, share and the tag #TakerBot seems to be being used by people -
Visual guide graphics below courtesy of Anthony Clark.
If you are now looking for a place to share, YouMagine is a very good starting point. GitHub is also an option, and a simple method to export all your things from Thingiverse uses a simple Python script by Carlos GarcÃa Saura - Look Here for info. Repables is also looking good for content sharing, and is being further developed right now. Ultimately work like the Thing Tracker Network, by Gary Hodgson may make it easier to link and share designs and models from almost any source, so don't stop sharing and keep it open source. If you see any other coverage on the Makerbot Patents, post links below. Thanks.
Other news - The 3D Printing Filament spool standard campaign is still going well, updates soon. E3D Just released the V6 hot-end -I have had one for a while - it's amazing ! ++Lots++ of new things to share with you soon, new printers, extruders, developments and materials :) So long as people don't take them and patent the work as their own... Rich.
I don’t
normally do wider 3D printing industry news on this Blog as it’s a technical
resource, but quite a few big things have happened over the last few weeks,
that have made many people look in a slightly different light on the whole 3D printing
industry. (Makerbot's decision to close source is discussed below)
I visited the TCT Liveshow at the NEC in the UK this week.
Todd Grimm opened the show with his presentation of where the 3D printing and Additive manufacturing industry is in it's life-cycle in a nutshell, "we are not yet ready for consumers using 3D printers"
I had an
interesting & mixed experience at this years TCT show – Quite a different
one from last year, let me explain –
So last
year I visited TCT in a professional capacity with suit, shirt and tie, this
year I decided to go along as a Maker – Jeans and a Woolly Jumper – general
enthusiast to see what reception I would get from all these many (different
sized) companies looking to sell machines for the next desktop industrial
revolution to the ‘general public’
I’m calling
my dress code the ‘maker test’ would I get any attention at all from these companies?, I’m sad to say
generally most of the companies failed, ignoring me for people in suits that
actually had very little interest in their product offerings.
Last year,
only Bits from Bytes and A1 technology were representing the lower-end market
sector and entry level machines.
This year
was very different.
The A1
technology stand was empty; they didn’t turn up on Day 1.
3D Systems - Cube -
My very
first stop was on the 3D systems stand, just by accident, but the Cube was on
display at the front of the stand with the Cathy Lewis guarding the Cube
printer.
(Cathy
lewis is the 3D systems representative in the Cnet video shown lower down in this post, in an
interview with Makerbot on the Replicator at CES2012)
The Cube
was trying to print, but unfortunately very badly, the drive mechanism looked
like it was partially blocked resulting in terrible surface quality with lots
of little holes and pips where variable extrusion was occurring. It was also
printing very slowly and at one set speed (I estimate about 20mm/Sec), with
only slightly faster travel speeds.
What is it doing with that bridge? and why is the surface quality so bad. And why has it wasted Raft material on sections with nothing on them! - Poor software!
I stood
looking at the Cube for many minutes, many other people in suits asked the same
things time and time over, how much is it “$1300” says Cathy, do you have a
brochure, “no, sorry we don’t” – How much are the cartridges “$50 each, and they
can print about 10 of these” – pointing to a 1.5” high chess piece.
Finally,
after everyone else had gone I said to Cathy it was nice to see a big company
doing a reasonably low cost machine “yes, some people think we are crazy”.
I asked if
she likes the printed cases (pointing to a number of Raspberry Pi cases
scattered around the Cube printer) – “yes they are wonderful, people really
like them”
Do you know
who designed it? I ask, no says Cathy, Well I had a hand in it’s design, really
says Cathy, not really believing me. How did we get hold of it then asks Cathy...
Well, you
would have got it from Thingiverse, I said. At this point Cathy’s face says it
all, she looks really uncomfortable and clearly wants to stop talking to me as
soon as possible. We then briefly discussed what a Raspberry Pi actually was,
Cathy had no interest whatsoever, and I was left wondering how they were going
to sell and support this machine to the general user and enthusiast?
In many ways it was
worth going to the show just to see her face, in that moment and short conversation.
Makerbot
had the Replicator V1 at the show, I didn’t see it actually printing anything
all day, everyone else had running machines.
If you want to be a Makerbot Distributer, the Minimum order quantity is 10 machines and for that they will give you 25% discount, Makerbot has two resellers in the UK, and they were very keen to sign up more on these terms.
I was
fortunate enough to be standing on the Makerbot stand when Todd Grimm asked the
Senior American Makerbot Sales representative a few interesting questions, the
response coloured by recent events and the Replicator 2
launch.
Todd asked
about the Replicator 2, what makes this machine a pro grade (prosumer) machine
and how is it different from Version1?
Makerbot –
It’s now 100micron layer resolution and we have tightly controlled PLA printing
materials that deviate less than 100micron in size.
This
machine is PLA only, we have removed the heated bed so users can get printing
faster and we have a simple 3 point levelling system.
It’s also a
single extruder system only.
I was
thinking – That’s a lot to remove, why is it then so much more expensive than a
Replicator V1? And can’t a Replicator V1 do 100micron? It should be able?
When pushed
on the reason it was now a Pro machine, the support staff were talked up as the
main reason for Makerbot being different at the lower-end machines –
Thingiverse was also mentioned a lot in the conversations and is obviously very
important for them -
Makerbot –
“Some people will not like that we have gone closed source, but they all use
Thingiverse whether they like it or not, we have the biggest community”
The
discussion continued, I moved on.
Sadly, they
also failed the Maker test; I was reasonably ignored every time I went on their
stand. I didn’t pick up a Makerbot sticker… Where would I put it now?
Maketbot
are obviously seeing a change on Thingiverse, they are trying to focus on the
Terms of Service questions that also sparked up debate and fractures in the
community along with the bigger issue of going closed source – They even have their Lawyer trying to explain that ‘everything will be ok’ Trust us.
Can people
in the community trust a company that changes one of its most fundamental founding
principal’s?
Will
Makerbot’s new Pro-sumer customer appear, and will 3D Systems now be free to take
the entry level sector with the Cube? Do any of us now really care?
It’s never
a dull moment with 3D printing.
Remembering back - On
3Dprinting.com the blog post in Jan2012 stated this about the video below –
“This is a great
interview that shows the development in the personal 3D printer market and the
differences between the open-source product of MakerBot and the closed-source
product of 3D Systems.”
I
do now wonder how different 3D systems and Makerbot will look in Jan2013 at the
next CES?
If it's consumers or pro-sumers they are after then maybe the closed source 3D printer war has now started, while the open source community just marches on regardless, I hope Makerbot does not regret it's decision.
Also look
out for the comment about the Replicator case looking wooden, I bet they was
the point Replicator V2 got a metal overcoat!
Here are some really great things I spotted at the Show -
3D printed Mug - Bits From Bytes had a separate bigger stand (last year just a corner of 3D systems) I spotted Ian Adkins and Ed Sells (Sells Mendel) walking around; they were doing a lot of research by the looks of things.
Another one from BFB, they ignored me and so failed the 'Maker test' this time around.
There was a lot of 3D scanners at the show, this chap with the beard was being 3D scanned with a hand-held unit.
This is a Prop for a Film printed with a Voxeljet 3D printer - they can print 4m x 2m objects!
Voxeljet printers are used by Car companies to make massive prototype parts.
Propshop model-makers Ltd - Passed the 'Maker test' with flying colours, he even showed me some secret new massive 3D printed models for a new film coming out on his iPad.
Another Voxeljet print
Ultimaker -
Yea! Ultimaker! - Always had their machines running all day! - They had the busiest stand out of almost everyone, including many of the really big names.
Very friendly people and amazing quality things on display, thanks Ultimaker you made my Day!
I also met Paul Candler on the Ultimaker stand, he has made some of the finest profiles for Netfabb. Ultimaker users are enjoying resolutions down to 20microns!
Needless to say Ultimaker passed my Maker test.
Leapfrog -
It's big, slow printing and looks like a BFB printer with a metal overcoat. I could not find out much more about it as they didn't talk to me :(
Fabbster -
Fabbster have a Closed source printer (Sintermask) that operates in a similar to most RepRaps, it has no heated bed at the moment and uses Rafts for prints. Quality is reasonable.
They have a patented stick deposit system, this is basically Injection moulded plastic sticks of material that are loaded into a magazine and snap together as they exit into a PTFE tube onto it's way to the extruder.
They have many materials including a flexible (soft PLA style) that was very nice to handle.
The machine is big and well built. They were very nice at the show and passionate about people using their printers and materials. They passed the Maker test and we chatted for some time about the machine.
MiiCraft -
I ended up with a very bad photo of the Miicraft printer, so I'll just show some of the printed objects.
Very nice people and happy to tell and show you everything about their resin based 3D printer.
Ships from Taiwan, UV resin is quite expensive, machine is $2200 but the results were stunning! - Very good, Maker test - pass
PP3Dp -
The PP3Dp printers are looking a little old now, but still performing well, if not a little slow to print.
Didn't talk much, they were not really communicating with the people showing interest.
They had some free samples of screw-pots and a few different machines. Maker test - Poor (D-)
Mcor -
Inside an Mcor 3D printer (not really a printer, it cuts models out of sheets of office paper)
They are all paper. I'm not sure it that's a good thing or not. They must be selling machines? and I expect they will do well in the movie industry, props, and animation maybe even some product design etc. but I can't quite see a good use as functional models and certainly not with consumers.
Very friendly and animated about their machines and low-cost process. Maker test - Pass
Lots of other companies were at the show, some interesting, others looking very dated. Most of the others ignored me.
