David Wood
David Wood
  • Видео 65
  • Просмотров 64 415
Idex Part 12 - Double Gantry Fixed Bed IDEX
Some thoughts about how the @properprinting Double Gantry printer could be progressed.
Refer here for original Properprinting video.
ruclips.net/video/XBJMz457pEo/видео.htmlsi=U01BzZccgLWEEuii
See the rest of this series, plus this thread on the Duet3d forum for more info.
forum.duet3d.com/post/348374
Просмотров: 32

Видео

IDEX part 10 Dual Gantry Mirror mode 4 print head Benchy
Просмотров 924 часа назад
For symmetrical models it might be possible to use all 4 heads on a Dual Gantry IDEX system - to get print speeds 3-4 times as fast as a single headed printer.
IDEX Part 7 - Dual Extruder Dual Gantry parallel printing concept
Просмотров 474 часа назад
A simulation of a Dual Gantry Dual Extruder 3d printer - that could print in parallel. Slightly less capable than the full dual IDEX approach suggested in other videos, but also less complex. See this post in the Duet3d forum for background info. forum.duet3d.com/post/348374
Idex Part 9 - Parallel Printing Demo. - Ratrig, Reprap, Duet
Просмотров 5394 часа назад
Some simulations of in blender of a double gantry IDEX multi colour printer I am developing. For background info see this thread on the Duet3d Forum forum.duet3d.com/post/348521 00:00 Intro 00:20 GCode Post Processor 01:15 Single Colour Simulation 02:13 Multi Colour Simulation 03:23 Next Steps
IDEX Part 8 Dual Gantry Belt Routing
Просмотров 9412 часов назад
Some Animations of how the belt routing would work on the proposed Dual Gantry IDEX machine.
IDEX Part 6 - Dual IDEX - extra Motors and Belts
Просмотров 11419 часов назад
Some thoughts on the additional motors and belts that would be needed to support a second IDEX Gantry.
IDEX Part 5 - Advanced Simulations - V2
Просмотров 5821 час назад
Some more advanced simulations - or single threaded and parallel printing. Version 2 - with cycles render of all simulations 00:00 Intro 00:10 Sea Cloud Cycles Render on Dual Extruder 00:52 Full Chess Set on Dual Extruder 01:25 Chess Set on Quad Extruder
IDEX Part 4 Dual Extruder Multi Material Simulation
Просмотров 86День назад
Simulations of a non IDEX - Dual Extruder Multi Material Printer. Many of the same multi colour and multi material benefits still possible. Especially if a limited duplicate mode is possible. 00:00 Intro 00:11 2 Colour Benchy 00:32 4 colour prints 01:24 7 Colour prints 01:55 Duplicate Mode 02:07 Auto Switching
IDEX Part 3 - Dual IDEX Proposal - V2
Просмотров 226День назад
Investigations into adding a 2nd Y Gantry onto a Ratrig VCore4 IDEX - to make up a total of 4 print heads V2 of video - includes 7 colour demo print in addition to 4 colour 00:00 Intro 00:41 4 Colour 01:15 7 Colour 02:02 Duplicate & MIrror Modes 02:31 Auto switching 02:56 Chess Board 03:20 Sphere
IDEX Part 2 - Ratrig VCore 4 IDEX MMU Simulations
Просмотров 680День назад
Some thoughts and simulations of how the Ratrig VCore 4 IDEX MMU might work if it is released at some point soon. With some ideas on how IDEX parallel printing could also further speed things up. Animations created in Blender. 00:00 Intro 00:17 4 Colour Print 01:17 7 Colour Print 01:53 Duplicate and Mirror Mode 02:19 Auto Switch 02:35 Globe
IDEX Part 1 - Dynamic Mode Switching Proposal
Просмотров 311День назад
A proposal for up to double speed printing on an IDEX 3d printer. Some example animations using a Ratrig VCore4 IDEX as an example. 00:00 Intro 00:28 Dual Material 00:40 Duplicate Mode 00:47 Mirror Mode 00:53 Automatic Mode 01:26 Chess Board 02:05 Air Ball 02:28 Christmas Tree 03:02 Next Steps
Sea Cloud 3d print
Просмотров 9528 дней назад
Some time lapses of the 3d print of Sea Cloud at Scale 1:250 Refer here for background info forum.bambulab.com/t/cruise-ship-print/5122/205?u=ukdavewood Music by Water Willow by Origami Repetika from freemusicarchive.org
Blender 3d printer animation
Просмотров 60Месяц назад
Simulation of the BambuLab X1C doing some interesting 3d prints. Refer here for background details forum.bambulab.com/t/blender-multicolour-bambustudio-gcode-importer/97948?u=ukdavewood Using x1c model from MaxG on Printables www.printables.com/model/284587-detailed-model-of-the-bambu-lab-x1-combo
Blender Multicolour GCode
Просмотров 493 месяца назад
Blender Addin to Import Multicolour GCode from Bambu Studio to create a Timelapse Simulation. The add-on is available here github.com/ukdavewood/Blender-Multicolour-GCode-Importer It is based on an earlier plugin by Kevin Nunley. The model shown in the demo is a derivation of this shoehorn model by Dave Wood makerworld.com/en/models/122098#profileId-131553
Dingy 3d print
Просмотров 434 месяца назад
Dingy 3d print
P&O Britannia Cruise Ship 3d print
Просмотров 1,7 тыс.5 месяцев назад
P&O Britannia Cruise Ship 3d print
P&O Cruises Fleet 3d print short version
Просмотров 3966 месяцев назад
P&O Cruises Fleet 3d print short version
P&O Cruises Fleet Fusion 360 design and 3d print
Просмотров 2056 месяцев назад
P&O Cruises Fleet Fusion 360 design and 3d print
3d Printer - Purge Waste Table
Просмотров 2937 месяцев назад
3d Printer - Purge Waste Table
Bambu Lab X1C P1P P1S IDEX Conveyor Belt, up to 32 colours, larger prints, Add on concept
Просмотров 1,3 тыс.8 месяцев назад
Bambu Lab X1C P1P P1S IDEX Conveyor Belt, up to 32 colours, larger prints, Add on concept
Bambu Lab A1 Mini Blender Timelapse Simulations
Просмотров 2788 месяцев назад
Bambu Lab A1 Mini Blender Timelapse Simulations
Could multiple cantilever 3d printers be combined together to allow parallel printing.
Просмотров 6278 месяцев назад
Could multiple cantilever 3d printers be combined together to allow parallel printing.
Prusa Multi Mini - Animation
Просмотров 15 тыс.8 месяцев назад
Prusa Multi Mini - Animation
A1 Multi Mini proposal
Просмотров 1,6 тыс.8 месяцев назад
A1 Multi Mini proposal
Azura A1 mini
Просмотров 1008 месяцев назад
Azura A1 mini
A1 Mini Blender Render
Просмотров 998 месяцев назад
A1 Mini Blender Render
P&O Arcadia vs Cunard Queen Victoria
Просмотров 9779 месяцев назад
P&O Arcadia vs Cunard Queen Victoria
P&O Cruises Arcadia Fusion 360 3d print
Просмотров 3059 месяцев назад
P&O Cruises Arcadia Fusion 360 3d print
3d print recycling - Part3. - more ships
Просмотров 13810 месяцев назад
3d print recycling - Part3. - more ships
3d print recycling - part 2 - Benchy's & Prime towers
Просмотров 16510 месяцев назад
3d print recycling - part 2 - Benchy's & Prime towers

Комментарии

  • @properprinting
    @properprinting 6 часов назад

    Thank you very much for sharing my project and showing these use cases! Turning both gantries into IDEX systems is pretty wild!

  • @王宇-k5c
    @王宇-k5c 18 часов назад

    This just popped up in my feed, looks awesome!!! I really was thinking about this in my head and calling it DIDEX (dual independent dual extruder) but with my January finals I really don’t have time to model a machine. I was also thinking about implementing the hybrid coreXY thing that RatRig has with their larger core-4 printers. I will definitely turn this into reality some day when I have time, are you active in any other social media?

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 18 часов назад

      @@王宇-k5c thanks. I occasionally post on facebook. The printer in the animation is actually a Ratrig Vcore4 Hybrid IDEX RMMU 400 (with the kinematics doubled up) and most of the parts hidden (other than belts and motors). See earler videos in the series for the while printer. I agree that parallel printing has to be the way ahead. I'm in the ratrig facebook group. I'm posting most of the details about this initiative on the Duet3d forum.

  • @8MEKAN8
    @8MEKAN8 19 часов назад

    Thank you for your effort, promising progress in a short time. It will work for a while, but eventually, this task needs to be transferred to the slicer somehow. A well-designed algorithm added to the slicer can determine the optimal separation for each layer. However, I haven’t done any research on where to start making additions on the slicer side. Have you done any research on this topic?

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 18 часов назад

      @@8MEKAN8 thanks. No re slicer - I;m just post processing the gcode out of Bambustudio. I think I can get quite a long way with algorithms by just taking all of the moves the slicer has defined for each layer and reordering and splitting them. In the first instance I am just dividing each layer into 4 segments and then printing them in 2 sets to avoid head clashes. However there is a fair bit of time when only one print head is in use - so will likely optimise once I have done some real testing. I think developments to slicers are fairly often developed initially as post processors to prove the concept. Will probably fork Orcaslicer if I exhaust the post processing route.

  • @JVan8631
    @JVan8631 День назад

    Look pretty amazing, cant wait to see it on a machine :D Two thoughts I had about you process: 1. You could increase strength significantly by choosing the shape of the middle part in such a way, that the width alternates between normal, and wider by two times the infill grid distance in the width direction. With a suitable infill pattern (one that stays symmetrical to your center piece regardless of z-height) you should be able to perfectly match the pattern and create a very strong bond. 2. You could also use your middle piece to include any non symmetrical features of your part.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 День назад

      Thanks - good idea -. In this version I cut up the middle part in the slicer - which I think can only do straight lines. But there are plenty of other ways to do this - either in design software or in a gcode post processor that could take into account the suggestions you made. Agreed also about the middle bit - which is mainly there to avoid head clashes - but also for the particular model I chose has non symmetrical parts.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 День назад

      Have improved my demo based on your suggestion. I ended up creating some 'cutter' parts using F360 - and then applying them to the model in the slicer as 'negative parts'. Have done a bit more explanation and some pictures here. forum.duet3d.com/post/348585

    • @JVan8631
      @JVan8631 2 часа назад

      @@dwuk99 I think I quickly make a Duet3D account, so I can answer directly to your posts.

  • @marcellofialho677
    @marcellofialho677 2 дня назад

    This is beyond awesome! If 3d printers are going to be like that in the future I suppose 2 things will be needed: 1 - smaller extruders (because the printhead has to be small as possible to avoid collisions. If they can figure out how to use bowden extruders effectively when printing at 600mm/s, they would be a good option). 2 - Multithreaded filament spools.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 2 дня назад

      Thanks - agree - either smaller extruders or bigger printers! - This is modelled on a RatRig VCore4 400x400. I think rotating the front gantry around and maybe offsetting the hot ends so that they can go quite close to each other in the X and Y directions would help. For the filament - what it would like to see is some sort of spool management /splitting solution - where you feed in one or two rolls and it unwinds it and divides it up into separate internal spools - which it can then target at whatever print heads require it.

    • @marcellofialho677
      @marcellofialho677 2 дня назад

      @@dwuk99 It sounds what you are talking about is something like a reverse Palette 3 machine. which instead of splicing. splits filament on demand. Also I believe remote extruders will need to make a come back. On the subject of big machines, the other day I saw a video in which a guy printed a giant (benchy like but real) boat using a diy large scale format printer. This is definitely a use case for machines like yours (I don't mean benchy style boats, just regular boats).

  • @INNOCUBE3D
    @INNOCUBE3D 2 дня назад

    How to contact

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 2 дня назад

      It looks like the Duet3d forum has a direct messaging capability - so if you look at my posts on there you should be able to find my ID, NB/. In the first DM please say what it is about as I tend to block DMs without any initial explanation. Or I know the BambuLab forum has this capability too - if you look at some of my other videos you will find links to some of my BambuLab posts.

  • @marcellofialho677
    @marcellofialho677 2 дня назад

    This is awesome. Did you try implementing this? Marlin and Klipper are single threaded. You either have to modify klipper to be multithreaded (since it is the only firmware that runs on linux) or use a multithreaded gcode feeder to control multiple klipper or Marlin based mainboards. Does reprap support multithreading?

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 2 дня назад

      Thanks- yes. but I've only implemented it in software so far - yes Reprap/Duet has experimental support for Multi Threaded - only two queues at present though - but that's enough for 2 Gantries. docs.duet3d.com/User_manual/RepRapFirmware/Multiple_motion_systems

    • @marcellofialho677
      @marcellofialho677 2 дня назад

      @@dwuk99 this is ground breaking. It looks like you are already able to generate gcode that would drive two print heads without collisions. You don't really need idex to prove your concept, all you need is a dual gantry (double core-xy) with a shared z. What I am saying is this would be enough to draw attention from the entire 3d printing community.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 2 дня назад

      @@marcellofialho677 Thanks - agreed about not needing IDEX to prove the concept- I think though I need the Z's to be slightly independent to avoid clashes with the print etc - but I admit I haven't yet really inspected how much Z hopping there actually is in the test Gcode files I have processed - plus also haven't worked out how to do add the Z varying ability without adding weight to the gantries.

    • @marcellofialho677
      @marcellofialho677 2 дня назад

      @@dwuk99 you could use small steppers in each printhead to lift the hotend when a z-hop is needed. In this scenario you would have two completely independent 3d printers (so you would have x1, x2, y1, y2, z1, z2, e1 and e2 axis) sharing the same bed. However z1 and z2 would only ever differ by a very small amount, so that z1 = z + z1_offset and z2 = z + z2_offset. You would split z in two components to make this possible. I found a very light stepper that I purchased some time ago that could be used to lift a hotend. It is the 28BYJ-48. It is a 5v stepper Aliexpress sells complete with the driver. Very cheap.

  • @-PANZER_VIII_MAUS-
    @-PANZER_VIII_MAUS- 2 дня назад

    Better than snapmaker j1s great work 👍

  • @blacknet21
    @blacknet21 5 дней назад

    Can we see a summary of the results table ?

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 5 дней назад

      Good idea - will add a summary to my structure for later parts of this series.

  • @BenRyherd
    @BenRyherd 5 дней назад

    I know over-constrained kinematic systems are done (with the "AWD" speed printers and with dual z), but technically these are over constrained correct? You have 3 axes of freedom per gantry: Gantry Y movement, Left Extruder X Movement and Right Extruder Y Movement, but 4 motors driving each gantry. It'd be a longer belt for one extruder, but I would think you could drive Gantry Y axis and X axis of left extruder and then just have a belt path that controls X axis for the right extruder and get it down to 3 motors per gantry.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 4 дня назад

      Thanks for the comment - Yes I agree that it would be nice to only have 3 motors per gantry rather than 4. The Kinematics illustrated are the RatRig VCore4 Hybrid - which adds 2 extra Y motors for one extruder. Then when they add IDEX they rejig the belts I think to add in the 2nd IDEX extruder X movement. I just added a second implementation of their whole IDEX setup inside the first one at the back to drive the 2nd gantry. I guess if I could use one of the Hybrid Y axis (top motors) - from the first gantry to drive the Y direction of the 2nd gantry then that would work quite well. Not sure though whether adding extra belts to allow one side to drive the Y axis from both sides will bring any issues.

  • @Mikey91112
    @Mikey91112 5 дней назад

    What if instead of spinning the arms, you could spin the bed. 🤔

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 4 дня назад

      Thanks - yes I think that might end up being more practical. My current thinking is to have a CoreXy IDEX printer with 2 Y gantries to bring the 4 heads. The heads won't be fully independent - but each gantry will be - in all directions including Z. I am doing a series of videos on this - the first few of which are already published. I do intend adding the rotary bed addon option too fairly soon to the series - to demonstrate 4 way vase mode printing it a bit more detail - as I think rotary is the only way to do more than one thread of vase mode at the same time.

  • @8MEKAN8
    @8MEKAN8 8 дней назад

    Only limit is slicer, these four extruders can built same part by working synchronously.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 8 дней назад

      Agreed - I think it is possible to do a fair amount of parallel printing using existing slicers by manually splitting objects into mirrored and duplicate parts - and telling the slicer to differentiate between them by using different virtual colours, ultimately the best way ahead would be for the slicer to automatically pick out parts of shapes than can be parallel printed - either mirrored or duplicated.

    • @8MEKAN8
      @8MEKAN8 7 дней назад

      ​@@dwuk99I meant that four extruders can print on one piece simultaneously. Not different piece for every extruder.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 дней назад

      @@8MEKAN8 agreed that it would be nice is a slicer could do the segmentation automatically, I have included a few single object 4 extruder prints in part 3 and 5 of the series. I also think it wouldn't be too hard to write a gcode post processor that splits each layer of symmetrical print plates into parts that can be targeted at multiple extruders at the same time. Will explain more and demonstrate in a later video in the series.

    • @8MEKAN8
      @8MEKAN8 7 дней назад

      @@dwuk99 O i see, you did it already. I agree, simultaneous work for extruders on the separate gantry wouldn't be hard to slicer. I mean two extruder on the same part simultaneously but these extruders not on the same gantry. Doesn't matter how complex part is in my opinion it would be easy. But i think simultaneous working for extruders on the same gantry can be really challenging for the complex parts.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 дней назад

      @@8MEKAN8 I agree that producing completely different tracks and extrusions on the different print heads - even on the different gantries is a challenge to work out and avoid head clashes - particularly in this design where all of the gantries share the same Z axis. So they wouldn't be able to do anything like Z hopping and also they would need to coordinate with each other in terms of layer times etc - with some maybe going slower than the others so that they all start and finish at the same time. I thought I would defer this issue for now and concentrate only on things like segments of mirror and duplicate mode - probably with some variations like rotating the same shape across the two gantries and distorting on the X axis within the two heads on the same gantry. I think all of these modes would mean pretty much every individual line of filament extruded is the amount and all Z axis hops would be needed at the same time.

  • @DonZeyer
    @DonZeyer 12 дней назад

    Great work! I love the idea. Is there a way to use the purge as infill, Instead of a purge block? It should cut down on print time.

    • @HelgeKeck
      @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

      this is a slicer feature that exists already

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 12 дней назад

      Thanks - yes - I haven't really concentrated on purging in these simulations. BambuStudio allows the prime tower to be turned off - but it does increase the risk of print failure or quality issues, plus also disables flush-into object functionality - so I generally leave the prime tower turned on. I think the ultimate solutions to reducing purge waste are: 1) Lots of print heads / or hot ends, 2) Optimising flush lengths. 3) Flush into infill / objects. 4) For flush-into objects being able to print them at different Z heights to the multi coloured objects.

  • @HelgeKeck
    @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

    i like your animations. But you have forgotten the synced mode, both MMUs loaded with the same colors to reduce filament swaps.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 12 дней назад

      Thanks, I wasn't aware of that mode on the Ratrig. I can't think how I would implement that in slicer settings - but I guess I could do it in gcode post processor, or in my firmware simulating Blender addin. It could get quite complicated to work out the optimum extruder to use for each colour at any particular time. I guess some sort of overall analysis of the gcode together with available spools of filament (including doubles) would be needed to suggest the optimum individual or double placement of filaments.

    • @HelgeKeck
      @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

      @@dwuk99 thats actually pretty easy. for the synced mode you have a lsicer profile with just 4 colors and not 8, the developmetn code i have does handes the rest already. It works already. you just tell ratos snyced mode = on

    • @HelgeKeck
      @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

      ratos knows it has 2 mmus with 8 total colros , if you print only with a 4 color profile it recognizes it

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 12 дней назад

      @@HelgeKeck Interesting - how does it handle the situation where you for example have a sequence of 3 colour changes that repeat - where it would be more efficient to sometimes ignore the fact that colours are available to both extruders and to do a serial colour swap on one extruder and keep the other one fixed on one colour for a while. That would require ratos to have access to the whole GCODE file I presume, Example below of this repeating sequence of colour changes: 123123123123 Always switch between Extruder A and B- A1,B2,A1>3,B2>1,A3>2,B1>3,A2>1,B3>2,A1>3,B2>1,A3>2,B1>3. - 10 changes in total Don’t switch Extruder A - A1,B2,B2>3,A1,B3>2,B2>3,A1,B3>2,B2>3,A1,B3>2,B2>3 - only 7 changes

    • @HelgeKeck
      @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

      @@dwuk99 RatOS has access to the whole gcode file, in fact we are already post processing it for the print.

  • @HelgeKeck
    @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

    i have made this on the VC3.1 IDEX, it works only with heavy slicer modifications unfortunately

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 12 дней назад

      Interesting - do you have any more details. I agree that it will need some sort of slicer or firmware modifications and some careful modelling. But I was thinking it might be possible to just put the mode changes in the tool change Gcode triggered by dummy virtual extruder numbers for some initial demos. To get the full benefit of parallel printing though I agree that ideally the slicer should chunk up the models automatically.

    • @HelgeKeck
      @HelgeKeck 12 дней назад

      @@dwuk99 it actually doesnt need any firmware modifikations. after all these are just copy mirror or single mode prints. onyl thing you need to do is to tell the printer when wnd where yiu want to print which area and un which mode, thats the diffiult part

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 12 дней назад

      @@HelgeKeck Great thanks. I think I can work the mode changes into the tool change gcode either directly with slic3r conditional gcode, or if not via a gcode post processor. I'm finding using virtual extruders is working quite well for my 'simulated' printer. It actually only takes a few minutes to segment up the duplicate or mirror parts of the models either in Fusion or the slicer itself.

  • @oneletterlon
    @oneletterlon 14 дней назад

    Bro dreamt up a Prusa XL, after the XL

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 13 дней назад

      I am aware of the XL - I just think it is a bit too expensive and don't like the fact that you have a lot of extruders sitting there unused most of the time. Being able to use multiple extruders at the same time - either for the same or different prints at a substantially lower price is an interesting idea I think.

  • @SentryGaming275
    @SentryGaming275 20 дней назад

    I mean, this motion system can have many advantages over a regular printer, but if you're aiming for multi-material printing then this is very inconvenient, you'd might just wanna go with a tool changer system, it'll be much cheaper and much simpler.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 20 дней назад

      @@SentryGaming275 thanks - probably not practical as you said, but certainly a lot cheaper than currently available tool changers. Am currently working on a 4 headed idex which I think might be a good compromise.

  • @DeFineAl
    @DeFineAl Месяц назад

    Outstanding work Might be able to justify buying a 3d printer now!

  • @-PANZER_VIII_MAUS-
    @-PANZER_VIII_MAUS- Месяц назад

    So cool man ITS PERFECT!!!

  • @Extrin6_3D
    @Extrin6_3D Месяц назад

    interesting, especially with the cruise

  • @MakingLights-t2m
    @MakingLights-t2m 2 месяца назад

    Brutal

  • @AwwwSnapperz
    @AwwwSnapperz 5 месяцев назад

    I like the out of the box thinking but the filament waste argument is kinda tired and misleading. One a bambu printer a filament swap is about .2g on avg. So it's about 5 swaps per gram or up to 1000-5000 swaps a 1kg roll. Prime towers can be reduced or outright eliminated if you make a sacrificial, but functional, purge to infill part. There is a "long retract before cut" option which has been shown to reduce filament purge by up to 70% too with purge amount tweaking. So if you took a bambu p1s or x1c you would need hundreds of thousands to well over a million filament swaps to get to the break even price of an XL 5 head. and you would then have access to 16 colors instead of 4 in your demo or 5 in the XL case. so for the cost of the 4 prusa mini you can have 4 A1 with 4 color ams lite or 2 p1s with ams with the option of expansion. so 256(cubed) volume X 4 with access to 16 colors(4 per machine) or 256(cubed) volume x 2 with access to 8 colors initially or 32 colors maxed out. (16 per machine)

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 5 месяцев назад

      @@AwwwSnapperz all very good points - which if you look at some of my other videos or my making better used of purge waste thread you will see I am pretty familiar with. To me the biggest issue and hopefully the next big step forward in multi colour printing is the massive time savings that reduced numbers of colour swaps and parallel printing could bring, The ratrig vcore4 ams idex will be a small step in this direction - and I have a feeling that the next BL larger format printer may also be AMS But i believe fully independent multi colour printing is where the real time savings start to come, 4x A1minis with AMS lites would potentially give you 16 colour printing and more than 4x faster print times due to the reduced number of colour swaps.

  • @MrChoklad
    @MrChoklad 5 месяцев назад

    I was thinking of something like this, but i was thinking of having simply the bed move. Imagine having the 4 printers set up in a circle, with some additional hardware you could place all the beds on a single disk and attach a motor to it, each printer would work on one bed, then when a material change is needed the disk would rotate and put bed #1 in the printer #2, with the additional benefit that now printer #1 is free to start a new piece until the original piece it was working on finishes being worked on by the other printers. You could have the benefit of 4 printers working in parallel with 4 possible material changes AND virtually no down time. The software to make this work would certainly be a challenge because all 4 printers have to be syncronised, but the benefits are interesting.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 5 месяцев назад

      Yes - I am also thinking that a circular bed could help. I've made a short to show one way of doing it where the heads all rotate around a circular bed independently - but I think it would be more practical to have 4xXY printers also collaborating on a circular bed - a bit like the machine that Nathan Builds Robots has built - but with full XY movement, rather than just in/out like he has done. There will as you said be big benefits in terms of colour changes - but I think the real game changer will be the ability to print the same part in parallel across multiple heads.

    • @MrChoklad
      @MrChoklad 5 месяцев назад

      @@dwuk99 yeah a singular axis with the head on that pivots around a center point is cool but much more complicated to make. The 4 printers on 4 beds that move from one to the next is cool af tho. One problem though is certainly layer time per each printer. If printing in parallel each layer is still gonna be as long as the longest layer currently being printed among the 4 printers, so the actual efficiency of the parallel printing would vary wildly depending on the piece, but I believe there would still be interesting use cases, especially with pieces made of different materials. Think of a part that uses pla for the structure, some tpu for some corners and maybe water soluble supports. A machine like this I believe would smoke any mmu currently on the market, and it does have some additional complexity but if it works it's worth it.

  • @Todestelzer
    @Todestelzer 5 месяцев назад

    The hardware is the easy part. The problem is always the software 😂

  • @rgsattphone
    @rgsattphone 6 месяцев назад

    I had a similar idea 3 years ago.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 6 месяцев назад

      Did you go anywhere with it? What I am currently working on is slicing to support such as setup. Plus in practice what I will probably end up doing is having 4 heads that move X/Y, plus also a rotating bed and I think it will be able to achieve the same range of movement with less tangling of cables and filament etc.

  • @MrBlakBunny
    @MrBlakBunny 6 месяцев назад

    the channel "Proper printing" is working on a similar concept, ruclips.net/video/XBJMz457pEo/видео.html , i do like your concept of upcycling cheaper printers

  • @FriedOrca
    @FriedOrca 6 месяцев назад

    Promising idea. Check out this parallel printing prototype from Nathan Builds Robots. ruclips.net/video/p3-GTWMkm24/видео.html

  • @SirRobinII
    @SirRobinII 6 месяцев назад

    cool idea but you would have 4 motors per print head, x y z and extruder. You would need a I2C or something else to run all those printers because I dont think we have a 16 stepper drive board. All the Y axis's are on the same rail and you would need a way to fit 4 motion systems on it. Rack pinion or a long screw and driving the nut could work. I think 4 belts would take too much room.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 6 месяцев назад

      Thanks for the comment. I envisage each head having its own donor controller board and psu - with something like a raspberry pi coordinating the 4 printers. Haven't worked out the details of how the Y axis would work - rack and pinion would I guess be easiest - especially if you wanted the printers to be able to be separated.

  • @truvak
    @truvak 6 месяцев назад

    Good idea but only for some solutions, it adds complexity, the one that might work is for the long, one color bed, but I am not sure if warp can be avoided.

  • @ypzmkx4
    @ypzmkx4 6 месяцев назад

    The concept is great but it looks expensive and space consuming for one printer with 4 extruders. It makes more sence if you stuff 4 extruders in one normal printer like Creality CR-X (its dual extruders already) but four extruders.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 6 месяцев назад

      Agreed - in the first instance I am expecting to try modifying an IDEX printer to add 2 additional independent extruders. Then eventually I would get 4 full independent printers - probably in a 2x2 configuration like shown in one of the options - but probably also with a circular bed that can additionally rotate occasionally to move the print around to allow the different heads to reach it.

  • @TheShorterboy
    @TheShorterboy 6 месяцев назад

    adobe had one of these 10 years ago, it's still on youtube

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 6 месяцев назад

      Thanks yes I have been shown the adobe video - shame it never got developed - I would still like to progress something along these lines. Before purchasing lots of extra printers I will probably start with an IDEX bed slinger, with a couple of extra fully independent cantilevered heads added (making 4 heads in total) to see how far I can get with it.

    • @TheShorterboy
      @TheShorterboy 6 месяцев назад

      @@dwuk99 the problem is the slicer not the printer you need to divide up the print and have overlapping layers so you're not trying to but join two sections

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 6 месяцев назад

      @@TheShorterboy Agreed - how I see it working is that you divide up each layer into sections - probably double the number of print heads (so 8) - so that the heads to not clash with each other while they are printing their allocated section, plus have the sections overlap between layers to help with strength. For initial prototyping I would expect to divide the model into the 8 sections prior to slicing - probably in Fusion 360 or using some sort of python script to split the STLs. Then slice the model as 8 colours, then post process the generated GCODE to split out the 8 colours into separate files for each print head.

    • @TheShorterboy
      @TheShorterboy 6 месяцев назад

      @@dwuk99 the simplest form I can think of is as the slicer process's each layer offset the X zero reference by + or - some value then slice that layer then repeat then maybe sync the gcode (no idea how) this will give give the overlap

  • @ChrisTheDBA
    @ChrisTheDBA 6 месяцев назад

    Captain Hudson, FTW!

  • @mikelittlejohn3743
    @mikelittlejohn3743 6 месяцев назад

    maybe the bed moving would be better

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 6 месяцев назад

      Would be easier, unfortunately if you replace the independent Y movement with the bed moving you can't do much parallel printing. I may well however have a moving bed too - that maybe only moves once or twice per layer - just to move the prints to a more convenient place for the heads to reach. T

  • @jacklu-mo2ki
    @jacklu-mo2ki 7 месяцев назад

    How to print the middle part

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thanks for the comment. Would probably offset one or more of the print heads so that they can go past the end of the Gantry into the middle. Would require some coordination with other print heads though to avoid head clashes.

  • @corrupted1850
    @corrupted1850 7 месяцев назад

    honestly if your going to do this what stopping you from havving a mmu on all of the nozzles for alot more colors and decreased change time as it can be prepared before hand

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Agreed - a lot of my own models are 8 colour - with some layers only one or two colours - so I would definitely be hoping to have some sort of colour changing solution on a few of the print heads - either MMU, AMS, Chameleon, Palette, ERCF. Or ideally something even better than these that allows you to have single or multiple rolls of each colour - and manages filament - sometimes splitting out single colours to go to multiple print heads at the same time (via some sort of internal cutting, unwinding and buffering). I have managed for example to get a 4 colour Palette2 to work on one head of an IDEX.

  • @corrupted1850
    @corrupted1850 7 месяцев назад

    and with the 4 color color change with each nozzle

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Yes - certainly see that as part of the plan - with the most frequently used colours in a model having a dedicated head, but with less frequent colours swapping in and out. Even for example for a 4 colour print on 4 heads - if some parts of print use only one or two colours it may be quite efficient to swap multiple heads to be the same colour for parallel printing parts of the model, with dedicated colours switched in for the more multi coloured parts of the model.

  • @corrupted1850
    @corrupted1850 7 месяцев назад

    why not do the wide bed and long bed types both at the same time for up to 8x speed with only 4 long

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      thanks for the comment, agreed - I don't see the max number being fixed - it could be anything from 2 upwards, and 8 or more certainly a possibility once the algorithms for print segmentation and head avoidance worked out. Might get quite expensive though unless cheaper base printer (link Kingroon for example) used.

  • @3DWolfEngineering
    @3DWolfEngineering 7 месяцев назад

    thats so cool well done mate, i really dont understand the people that just throw it away

  • @justiciaparaespana7236
    @justiciaparaespana7236 7 месяцев назад

    Instead moving the toolheads, you should move the bed but as you need tons of space behind and the front... I don't know if it would be a great idea.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thanks for the comment. I think I have included more space than you actually need - so I don't think the whole thing will need to be quite as long as I have shown. Re moving bed, for single head at a time multi colour printing for example I agree that a moving bed would be simpler. However the real driver for this sort of design is parallel printing. With fixed heads and a single moving bed every head would be limited to printing more or less the same thing at the same time, which would work for some models, but would severely limit what can be done in parallel. Nathan Builds Robots current rotary design is I think more or less as you suggest - will be interesting to see how he gets on with it and whether he ends up adding another degree of movement to his print heads.

  • @WaitedAtol
    @WaitedAtol 7 месяцев назад

    sick idea, i hope to see it a reality

  • @kilian29fr53
    @kilian29fr53 7 месяцев назад

    I guess the power cables might have a good time after 2 or 3 rotations. More likely to work if the bed turns as well. Fun idea though.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      My first thought is a 2 pole slip ring for the power, with the individual gantries wired together probably with a wifi raspberry pi also rotating, but I agree that rotating the bed too will remove the need for the gantries to fully rotate,

  • @gentleclash
    @gentleclash 7 месяцев назад

    How will you print at the centre?

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thanks for the comment. To print in the middle one or more of the nozzles will need to be offset such that they can move slightly beyond the end of the gantry and therefore reach the centre.

  • @blakes8901
    @blakes8901 7 месяцев назад

    I have a couple of ideas for you. Firstly though, great concept. I think this is nearly the ideal setup for any sort of large object with a large space in the center; for other types of prints though, the bed space would have to be expressed as a function of the radius, and it would be best used in that way to mass produce identical parts with many filament changes. I also think you may run into a problem with dimensional accuracy and/or stability with the amount of vibration something like this would produce combined with the lack of a second z-axis stabilizer. Ideally you would find a way to combine 2 or more extruders on the rods that support the tool heads, with the rods connecting to z axis stabilizers on both sides of the bed. This could solve the stability issue and the lack of access to the center, however there are drawbacks that I'm sure you've already thought of since you designed it like this, such as the requirement of print symmetry to truly optimize speed. Alternatively, perhaps an advanced input shaper unique to this printer could handle the vibrations. Also, I saw someone mentioning height difference between last and first extruders, and I very hesitantly want to say that perhaps a non-planar slicer printing at a 45 degree angle relative to the bed could handle it. Lastly, and this is likely the most difficult to do, if you could rotate the extruders to compliment said non-planar G-code, I think this could be truly extraordinary, however I am a novice with no higher education whatsoever so I might be WAY in the wrong about ALL of this.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thanks your comments and ideas. I know it wasn't in the demo video, but I don't think reaching the centre will be an issue as offsetting nozzle beyond the end of the gantry will be possible. I agree that there could be some stability issues and will likely need to add some extra bracing on the z axis - whether above or below. Yes combining extruders on rods might work, but I think that would make it more like and idex printer which can't do much parallel printing other than identical small models - but it may well end up being the best solution. I like the non planar ideas. I suppose vase mode is effectively non planner already - will be interesting to see what advantages you get from multiple vase mode threads. Properprintings parallel printing prototype has some 45 degree printing capabilities so will be interesting to see how that develops.

  • @JasonHartsoe
    @JasonHartsoe 7 месяцев назад

    The vibration would never be compensated or able to work properly trying to compensate for all other movement. Additionally it will take a lot to drive these and difficult to breakdown the gcode to handle each movement. To move 2 or more it would be faster with a single arm. Much faster. Rendering this obsolete. It’s a cool concept, but not practical.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      I agree that getting things rigid will be a challenge and also splitting the gcode, but unfortunately as soon as you link any of the arms together or make the arms fixed and move the bed then you lose the ability to parallel print most of the time. I think rotation is the easiest way to avoid head clashes, but it may end up being more practical to also rotate the bed - so that each arm doesn't not need to continuously rotate. Will be interesting to see how nathan builds robots gets on with his fixed arm take on this.

  • @oleurgast730
    @oleurgast730 7 месяцев назад

    You might simply use two or more printers with normaly fixed bed, like voron 2.4-350mm-style (the new sovol sv08 might be a budget choice here). Put them in a row. Construct a long movable bed tray allowing to move the bed trough multiple printers. This movable bed construction should be mounted above the existing beds and it should be removable. As the bed only moves while changing colour by moving to another printer, you do not need expensive linear rails. Still, every printer would be a seperate printer with it's own controller. The bed moving addon would have it's own controller. Software would be quite easy. There is a gcode command to set a pin state and a command to wait for a pin state. So all you need is a simple gcode postprocessing: You slice for a multi tool printer, as example a 3-tool. This gcode is seperated for each printer. After a layer is completed, a pin is set for a second to tell the bed moving system to go to the next printer. First printer now waits for a signal on another pin to continue to print (you might reduce also printhead temperature for waiting time and move the printhead to a comfortable position to avoid oozing etc). Bed moves to next printer, sends signal if final position is reached, next printer starts. If you place the rails for the bedchanger outside the original bed area, you still can position the moving bed only on one printer and the others use their original beds, so all three printers print independend. Or you only use 2 for dual material and the third prints something else. The biggest problem would be all the offset, belt-tension and skrew calibration, as all printers must print exactly the same. With a toolchanger the xyz-gantry is the same, you only need to compensate the xyz-offset of the tool. With multiple printers you have to exactly calibrate every printer to exactly the same. Much much harder. I thought about a "bed-mover" a few years back, before coreXY got common and before Klipper was popular. I thought two Deltas with moving bed might be a way. However, checking the differences between two identical Deltas, I actually considered it nearly impossible to get the result to be exactly the same on both printers. To say it simple: It does not matter if the print result of one printer is contantly of by 0.05mm in x-width on a 5cm cube. It would be a very precise hobby printer. However, if one printer has +0.05, the other -0.05 due to different belt tension, the difference would matter as the different materials would not be at the matching positions. This is the same for y of course. And for any slight deviation from perfectly perpendicular axis (skrew compensation). Ambient temperature changes screw up all your calibration anyway. So it wouldnt be a one time calibration, but you have to calibrate before any print ;-( Also, any multiple printer setup is hard to enclose. For PLA and PET-G an open frame printer might work. But ABS or Nylon - not recommended. So while I realy like the thought, imho the practical problems are still a problem. With CAN-bus or USB to connect toolheads, a toolchanger seems much more easy. Actually you easy could disconnect the toolhead due to this. A nice toolhead is not cheap. However, if you have multiple printers, you could make a toolchanging bay for only one, but still make the other toolheads compatible (not automatic toolchange but manually). So you still need only one tool per printer, but if you want multimaterial, you simply deactivate 1 or two of the other printers to lend their tools...

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thanks for your very comprehensive reply. I think what you are describing is very similar to this alternative proposal ruclips.net/video/uXqAenyT-fY/видео.htmlsi=OZiaiirHaGc6lwL2 . I agree that for any type of multi head parallel printer getting them to exactly align would be a challenge, and would need to be fully automated via some sort of probing of pre-determined fixed points. Shared head toolchangers is an interesting idea.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thinking about your suggestion further- I think a voron 2.4 type printer is a good choice as it is fixed bed (and therefore the heads are fully independent) - then it means that you could in theory have both printers printing part of the model at the same time on a joint add on sliding bed. Will attempt to simulate a parallel multi colour print with 3x 2.4 printers - with one also having a stealth changer.

  • @danmatsav
    @danmatsav 7 месяцев назад

    Isn't that sort of a toolchanger with extra steps?

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Yes, a bit like a tool changer - just cheaper and a lot faster.

  • @Volcanosaur
    @Volcanosaur 7 месяцев назад

    Very cool, but multi head printers introduce complexity that isn't justified by their benefits. Making single head printers faster and using multi-filament injectors would be better.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      I agree that multi nozzle would be a simpler route to parallel printing, however nozzle oozing tends to be a problem, plus multi colour printing would probably still be serial. I don't think the hardware for fully independent multi head parallel printing is particularly complex, but agree that the software will take some work to create.

  • @АдмиралХиппер
    @АдмиралХиппер 7 месяцев назад

    Looks good but.... when new layer comes to previous there is a big height difference, so at least there r needed some adjustments

  • @Altirix_
    @Altirix_ 7 месяцев назад

    defo interesting, i think the big problem you'll find over corexy toolchangers is the cost scale due to each new print head needs 3 motors (XYE) rather than 1 (E). but for 1-2 toolheads i suspect this could be competitive price wise with the right machine. The mini is £382.80 as a kit in the UK, just a non starter at that price. A V2.4 350mm stealthchanger I'm currently working on looks to be on track to cost me around £1k with 6 toolheads (i got a very good deal on a 350mm kit a while back, but still each extra hotend is costing ~£55). (printed part cost is not included as i printed it all myself) parallel single part printing is IMO the most interesting concept and might be worth the extra cost, the strategy to partition work however is going to be a complex problem, especially if the toolheads have potions that can intersect another printers, print path. you'd need to know when these collisions could occur and avoid generating gcode that causes this, some moves will have to be in essence atomic. there's also the question of how work is partitioned, the naive method would be each head gets some cube of area they work in. but this will result in poor utilisation if the dimensions of the object are not the same as the widest point. a per layer work distribution model could probs solve that, but my gut tells me the complexity of this becomes a problem is non trivial.

    • @dwuk99
      @dwuk99 7 месяцев назад

      Thanks for commenting, i agree that the prusa mini is quite expensive for this type of machine, I have done similar videos for other much cheaper machines llike kingroons, bit for some reason the prusa mini videos are getting a lot more views so may go with at least a 2 headed prusa version as the fhe first prototype. A 6 head stealthchanger sounds very interresting, especially for only £50 per head.

    • @Altirix_
      @Altirix_ 7 месяцев назад

      @@dwuk99 yeah, still in the build phase, but i managed to hunt out some pretty good deals for all the parts. hopefully when I'm done and have tuned ill put the results up on the voron discord because the cost I've achieved seems to be unheard of

    • @Altirix_
      @Altirix_ 7 месяцев назад

      im bad at math i miss calulated the cost its actually £60 per hotend

  • @jchester07
    @jchester07 7 месяцев назад

    Mode 3 reminds me of a printer I keep looking for but can't seem to find it anymore. I'ts a robot arm or a cantilevered printer which moves using a mecanum wheel in XY direction. The XY is not restricted to a frame or rail but it's running on the bed surface of which the bed can be anything even the floor. This gives it unlimited XY