[KwartzLab] 3D Printer: Next Steps

[Robert Gissing]

So basically the mechanics are good, but the controllers are bad and we need
a 4 axis controller board to fit the mechanics.  would a megaduino and a
stepper motor control board solve this problem?
Gus

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:52 AM, doug moen <doug at moens.org> wrote:

> Okay, I've now read enough blog postings, etc, to come to some conclusions.
> * When you build your own reprap, it's a DIY research project.
> * Part of that research project is hacking together a working software
> toolchain, which requires debugging and modifying software.  You can't
> expect to just download polished, bug free working software.
>
> We built our reprap from a Tech Zone kit, one which includes a
> particular version of the Tech Zone Gen 3 Electronics Remix.  Tech
> Zone sold HUNDREDS of these kits (possibly with several versions of
> the electronics) before doing a complete redesign and creating a
> "monolithic" single board controller.  This is hardly mass production,
> so there are relatively few people with hardware like ours, relative
> to more commercial 3D printers like the MakerBot and the MakerGear
> Mosaic (which come closer to the ideal of 'plug it in and it works').
> MakerBot has their own software development team, and have created
> polished, working software that works with their hardware.  Nothing
> like that seems to exist for Tech Zone hardware.  The software is DIY.
>
> http://adventuresin3-dprinting.blogspot.com/2010/11/what-causes-warts.html
> is someone else who has our kind of hardware, and who has also
> discovered that SkeinForge does not generate GCODE that is compatible
> with his firmware.  In this blog post, he analyzes a particular kind
> of printing error ("warts") that we are not far enough along yet to
> care about, explains how it is caused by bad GCODE, and how to fix it
> (he wrote his own GCODE postprocessor). And, of course, we've
> identified our own problems, different from "warts".  Kevin has
> figured out that the M108 codes generated by 3dtoolchain.com are
> incompatible with the FiveD firmware, and screw up our prints. And
> there is the still undiagnosed problem of the Y axis jumps (when
> printing SkeinForge generated GCODE), which is probably also a GCODE
> problem.
>
> I don't think there is any GCODE generator that works correctly with
> our firmware.  I kind of doubt that a working firmware/GCODE generator
> pair exists for our hardware as packaged software that you can just
> download and run.  Maybe there is firmware that is better than FiveD
> and works with our hardware, if so I'd like to know about it.  I'm
> more certain that there is no working GCODE generator, and that
> hacking Skeinforge is the best way forward.  [I've cc'ed Kimberly from
> Tech Zone. She can correct me if I'm wrong.  But since Tech Zone's own
> 3dtoolchain.com software generates GCODE that is incompatible with our
> firmware and hardware, I'm not optimistic.]
>
> I'm a software engineer.  I don't have Kevin's hardware smarts.  My
> plan is to hack Skeinforge (and possibly the FiveD firmware) until we
> can generate GCODE that is compatible with our firmware.  Some of the
> hacking will just be Skeinforge configuration settings (the goal is to
> come up with a machine configuration file that works with our
> printer).  Some of the hacking will involve adding new configuration
> settings to Skeinforge so that we can accurately describe our hardware
> and firmware.  I'll contribute the changes back to Skeinforge.
> Ideally, I shouldn't modify the firmware unless necessary, I should
> try to make Skeinforge work with our firmware, not vice versa -- that
> way, my changes will be useful to a larger group of people.
>
> There are other ways forward.  We could replace our electronics with
> something more modern, eg a single board solution that is compatible
> with the hottest and most capable firmware and software (eg, Sprinter
> firmware and the Pronterface front end).  That will require time and
> money, and I suspect we will still need to hack software.
>
> We could also get a new 3D printer, something that is closer to plug
> and play than a reprap.  That requires another $1000 in funding, more
> or less.
>
> The end goal is for our space to provide a 3D printer that can be used
> by artists and other makers, people who are not interested in reprap
> hacking.
>
> Doug Moen.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at kwartzlab.ca
> http://kwartzlab.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss_kwartzlab.ca
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kwartzlab.ca/pipermail/discuss_kwartzlab.ca/attachments/20110825/ae2ee0c6/attachment-0001.html>