Quick comparison: pro versus low cost FDM 3D printers

Are so-called "professional" entry-level 3D FDM printers worth their price?

A LinkedIn user in my network asked for more data when I said that "low cost" FDM printers could compare favorably to "professional" (and expensive) printers. Sure, it is a bold statement, and it does not hold for every of the many "levels of quality", as there are just too numerous. But let me get into more details.

In my opinion, an Ultimaker rev. 2 (~2K€) compares very nicely to a Stratasys UPrint-Se (~23K€)

I certainly do not want to say the "pro" printers are crappy, nor that any brand is crappier than the other, but I had the chance to compare my Ultimaker prints with a "professional" Stratasys entry-level printer (i.e. 1200€ versus 23K€). The outcome is that I just would never swap the two even if I was offered the "pro" one for free! Huh.

Now I am a power tinkerer, I know how to print, I prototype the printer itself, and I cherish freedom, but I tried to keep this bias out of the following arguments.

Thoughts and hints around hot ends

This post finally documents ideas and hints I had during the design of two hot ends I made last year.

My extremely small "cheesy hot end" (all-metal and actively-cooled), here with an Ultimaker printed support.
This hot end was very easy to make (only used basic tools) and also because the barrel is quite short.

At the time I already had ordered an E3D hot end, but the lead time was so big that I decided to give it try myself. Actually, since I attached it with this tiny E3D support on my Ultimaker, I almost never swapped my hot ends anymore because it is just so reliable... The only drawback is that the efficient heatsink could be made almost half the size for more Z space, less vibrations and less weight (hence my smaller, low cost --and low quality-- copycat by the way, see below). And it does not mean I stop thinking ;)

Features and improvements for a would-be homemade Ultimaker 3D printer

How would I re-design the original Ultimaker?

Quite some changes on the back of
my Ultimaker Original (aka v.1)!

The Ultimaker 1 (aka Original) is a well-built printer. It is probably one of the oldest and still best designs as proved by its incredible longevity.

I bought mine two years ago and, still, I feel quite confident that it would compare favorably in many aspects against a 30K€ FDM printer that a client bought last month. Is Stratasys really serious with this beast? May be there are better properties (eg. less warp due to fully enclosed?) But it also features a smaller build volume, a ridiculously limited and exceedingly expensive printing set of material. They also solved warping ABS by printing on... ABS beds (just try to remove it now when you forgot the in-between support!). You bet they bought Makerbot: overpriced "serious business" printers ought to be past, crappy obsolete printers. Too bad they are polluting MKI with greedy business practices though, and not the opposite.

OK, back to our subject. The "UM1" is one of the few printers you can take around you and which will keep printing very reliably without the need for re-calibration. It is also the only one I still blindly recommend... once the user knows that it is not that trivial to 3D print something. The new UM version is probably better in this regard, but it loses some "hackability" that I am fond of...

Still, the Ultimaker printers are big and they sometimes do not suit all my needs. If I was to re-design a clone, there are a few cosmetic but also structural modifications I would make, especially to the original design. Actually, many of my designs are all about improving the printer. Time to summarize what I did and what I would like to do!

Fixing Cura broken linux packages (slicing fails silently)

How to build Cura's slicer "SteamEngine" from scratch

Cura releases for Linux are often broken, probably because the author better implements features than packages (which is a good thing!) and because supporting Windows and MacOS is already painful enough ;)

One of the last issues kept happening due to the linux package made only for 64 bit architectures, which is stated nowhere and not checked during installation. So slicing cannot run when your PC is running a 32 bit linux OS. The easiest fix is to rebuild the slicer, which is a piece of cake compared to 3D printing!

Update (jan, 2014): full instructions on how to build Cura from scratch (see the last chapter).

How to 3D print nylon and trimmer line reliably: do not dry it too much and glue your bed!

How to 3D print Nylon reliably, cleanly and hassle-free.

A well-printed and robust dual-head Nylon mount (check it here).

Nylon is flexible, slippery and incredibly tough when it is printed correctly.

For me, it is a cheap and very useful material to 3D print. It is my best choice whenever PLA is not possible, and the very reason I never use ABS (more about the materials in this post).

But the nice properties of Nylon are the ones that precisely make it difficult to print ! By the way, Nylon also produces toxic fumes when heated, just like ABS, so it better be used in well-ventilated rooms.

I tried many known and unknown techniques to print reliably, and it is time I share my experience because I am happy with what I found.  Read on for more!

Fixes and howto for the DIY Fabscan 3D scanner

The fabscan is cheap... but it can be made to work.

For my curiosity, I bought a DIY "Fabscan" to try scanning small objects cheaply.

Update (2016): this post is very old. Many bugs were fixed since and I was told most of the improvements I list below were made in between. So make sure to get the latest software and doc from the official website, even before reading. And better even: the project is still active!

And it proved to be cheap, in all the possible ways.
In my opinion, the most annoying thing was the totally unusuable FabScan Ubuntu Live CD software.

This post is mostly about how to get it to produce an STL with the Ubuntu Live USB distribution specifically made for the fabscan.

A rant: open or closed, you get what you pay for.

A rant: open or closed, you get what you pay for.

I got "stimulated" again by a feedback on my wooden patterns related to the Python script I posted on thingiverse.

Here is the request (which I must say is fully honest and respectful):

     Very cool thing, but does anybody know how to use this with a makerbot?

     How can I edit the x3g file? Or an other way, how can I convert a gcode to x3g?

     Thanks in advance! -- j.

I have checked Markerbot own site: "Your Replicator 2X can only read files in the .x3g format".

So bad for their customers: they just do not care about the decade-old standard gcode format that all other players support in the field !

A famous strip from Nudel and his repraprip blog regarding Makerbot

Thinking about it for a while, I must say I will not help at all in this respect. Let me say why.

Help yourself: compatible 3D printer parts that are easier to swap!

Why would I ever re-design a working part of a printer?

It does look robust, but hard to disassemble! (Escher)

Most of customers and users do not tinker with their 3D printer. After all they paid for a robust printer and spent a lot of time setting it up properly. Once done, it stays so (well, at least with the Ultimaker). Sure, it is a desirable feature, especially for the "boxed/walled" frames. But it may get really annoying when you are trying printer part alternatives in the first place, which is the subject of this post.

By the way: there are really two main usages for a 3D printer: the obvious first is to print objects... while the second is to print replacement parts for the printer itself! Sounds weird, eh? "So what are you printing with your amazing printer? - Well, most of my time-consuming designs are printer part replacements!"...

Now back to the question: why shall I sometimes just re-design a part of the printer with no added value beyond the ease of manipulation?

Make it yourself: it can be better than what the industry sells you!

I got one interesting abrupt remark related to my hobbed bolt. The idea was that it was both difficult, and may be ridiculous to make one's own crappy part nowadays, while you could buy one, shiny, made on an precise and industrial machine. But who's the chicken and who's the egg? And which is better really? I think the answer is worth a post on its own here and there

The Aeolipile, may be the first steam engine.
It was certainly made "at home" by an early "maker" in Grece.
Since the business angels were not ready (cheap slaves were found everywhere),
we lost almost two thousand years before re-discovering it!

Extremely fat extrusion with a 1 mm nozzle

Going "nuts" and 3D printing with a 1.0+ mm nozzle!

A ridiculously big 1.1mm nozzle make it flow like hell !

After some testing with a 0.3 mm nozzle, I really had to try and post my quick and dirty tests with a huge one.

In fact, I had lost my smaller drill bit set made for smaller holes... So I took a brass cap nut, screwed it on a threaded rod, put it under my vertical drill press with a "regular" small drill, and here we go. I measured afterwards it to be something like 1.1 mm. Interesting...

Now for sure it was funny as a friend told me I just had made the first Scoubidou machine! But the first prints still were surprisingly good! Not only can I print very fa(s)t, but it still makes a nice print in the end.

Now, there were a few quirks I should have taken time to fix (see below), but very big nozzles are now part of my consideration when I want to prototype quickly and/or when the printed object needs no special accuracy: refining the ergonomics of a handle, or printing a toy and so on.