Comment on Bed slinger vs coreXY 3D printer
EmilieEvans@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
There is no clear answer to what is better.
CoreXY:
- lower moving mass (benefit)
- stationary bed (benefit)
- compact dimensions, easy to build an enclosure (benefit)
- VERY long belts (downside) => you can upgrade to high pitch ball screw and servos (no longer coreXY) => even superior are linear induction motors like those used in pick and place machines but both options would cost significantly more (will never be seen on consumer printer).
bedslinger
- short belts are good for dimensional accuracy
- independent axis makes it easy to get a high rigidity with good dampening characteristics further benefiting the print quality
- bed is moving this is a significant limitation for fragile/tall prints. You can pretty easily simulate the distortion this will cause. To keep it fair: Even with coreXY there will be some forces/drag from the molten material/nozzle to the printed parts.
TL;DR/Opinion?
- CoreXY it is for the consumer market. Those machines look nicer, are smaller and print quality matches expectations.
- For the (ultra) high end it gets blurry. There are outstanding bed slinger options out there made of granite frames, precision linear rails, and so on. These machines aren’t designed for high speed but for ultimate reliability and quality with price tages in the $10k+ range for a 200x200mm machine.
ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 4 days ago
I think the pros/cons come down to what you need a printer for. If you print mostly flat things, a bedslinger is fine. If you print large parts with sketchy bed attachments like I often do, a coreXY makes a lot more sense. You have no idea the amount of filament I wasted on giant brims and rafts to keep parts from flying off the sheet - not to mention the time it takes to print them.
And then of course, the Prusa XL in particular can be outfitted with up to 5 separate extruders. It has nothing to do with coreXY but it was a big part of why we bought it.
EmilieEvans@lemmy.ml 3 days ago
Prusa XL is a difficult machine.
On the one hand, it pushes toolchangers to the mainstream. On the other hand, it is utterly unreliable for it’s price.
Paying $5k for a printer and then finding out that the printed parts they used deform causing repairs, the heatbed title issues and some more and this is already after a massive delay (launched a few years later than they initially “announced”).
The previous goat of toolchangers was the E3D toolchanger. While not perfect it at least had the build quality to match its price point (btw. lower cost than the Prusa XL) and if you fix one minor design oversight they are reliable.
ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 3 days ago
So far our (new) machine is performing well. We’ll see how it fares in the long run. That’s one of the advantages of having my company purchase it: it’s getting a beating for work purposes, so I can test it properly before buying one for myself 🙂
EmilieEvans@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
for me it is the other way around:
private: Play & mess around. Gathering knowledge/expertise. Modifying/experimenting on a production machine is just not possible.
company/business: Use the knowledge to source (or modify it into) a reliable solution. After all, you are paid to produce good outcomes/results.