the physics simulation to pack models into the printing volume made me think about how some chaos is often needed to avoid local minima, and actually find the most efficient/stable configuration if they haven't already, they should make sure to add a function to vibrate the simulation, as that might help it pack models more efficiently into the volume.
A company called ALLshape makes €5995 SLS 3D printers. They are already for sale, I believe it’s a Dutch company. I ordered a sample and got a nut and bolt shipped to me for free, great looking and working part. Soon as I got my shed built I’ll order one of those.
While it’s true that you don’t need supports for SLS, you do have some design constraints to consider. For example, hollow objects need drain holes to allow the powder to escape. You also have process considerations, which doesn’t make it exactly enthusiast friendly. That said, I really want these guys to succeed and it’s amazing to finally see some more competition in this space.
I have found with the Formlabs products that orientation absolutely affects the finished product. I can look at a part from any of our Fuse or Fuse 1+ printers and tell you what orientation it was printed in.
@@93Martin with 0.25 mm spot size and 0.1 mm layer height that would be about the quality of a FDM printer with a small nozzle so it’s not surprising that you can still tell it’s print orientation and potentially see layer lines.
Also some parts shown would be a pain to post process. On their cube example with all the different mechanisms, they show a ball joint, getting all the powder out of the ball joint would be a nightmare.
@@conorstewart2214 The resolution and layer height between SLS and FDM are worlds apart. Yes you can tell SLS prints are 3D printed but it's not in your face like FDM. You can spot FDM prints from the opposite side of the room.
I like the enthusiasm of the young engineer during his presentation. I hope their kickstarter is successful and this becomes the new standard for 3d printing.
my last kickstarter was for some shoes that detected your movement for VR. Unfortunately, they only delivered a few pairs an abandon most of us. And so many 3d printer Kickstarters were scams from the start disappearing with peoples' money.
@@lorenzozapaton4031 They sold themselvs to Formlabs. Formlabs successfully prevented a cheap open SLS-printer in competiton to their $30000+ printers, securing the high margin market from makers. Hopefully the two got rich…
While I hope they succed, a few further concerns you havent pointed out from someone who has developed a SLS printer a few years back and is working with industrial ones on a daily basis. - Energy consumption: I think people really underestimate how much energy/costs it takes to heat a sls printer just below the melting point. The machines typically have to be preheated for 1-2 hours to have a uniform heat distribution and even for a small machine like this that would probably mean 2 - 3 kw/h, without even starting the print. So this means printing just 3-4 parts as the home user typically does is kinda expensive. - Maintenance: These machines have to be thoroughly cleaned before every print. Not only does the powder spill everywhere, the fumes from the process settle down everywhere and have to be constantly removed. Warping/shrinkage: There is a reason you most of the time only see rather small parts on those exhibitions. For lager parts you have to compensate for shinkage in all dimensions and futhermore the shinkage/deformation may vary on every point in the chamber as the parts cool down diffrently in regards to their position.
Finally someone else who agrees that this isn't for everyone. Love this video, love the SLS process, but not for everyone. I've been in weeks of trainings to get certifications with the HP MJF and various SLS processes. They also make no mention of the explosion proof vacuums and grounding of the machines properly.
Def way worse with metallic powders. Threat of fir or blast is probably pretty minimal if you follow the directions right and don't play let it snow with the powder.
They don't need explosion proof vaccums or grounding to be mentioned becuase their post processing stations and machines are explosion proof vacuums which are massively oversized and are extremely grounded and probably won't even turn on if they are not properly grounded (for industrial Selective Laser Sintering SLS). HP MJF (Multijet Fusion) uses liquid binders so you don't run into the powder hazard problems.
@@riakata not all powder can be contained. And so much of the HP builds aren't melted together. Having worked with HP for a couple years and am certified in the process it can still be a mess. No matter how much the powder recovery stations try.
Fantastic video breaking down exactly what they are doing. I have a unit on hand and should have a video up late next week on it. But this really is the perfect example of who exactly should be using Kickstarter as a platform to launch something new & innovative to the market
I disagree with you about this being a "perfect example" for Kickstarter. Kickstarter is intended to get a developed product into production. This product is still in testing and is inundated with unresolved problems. They're still having problems reliably feeding material into the build chamber. This product hasn't gotten out of alpha testing and is nowhere near ready for beta testing. Kickstarter funds are supposed to be used for getting a product into production. They are not supposed to be squandered on developing and testing something that one day might make it into production.
I think this isn't suitable for kickstarter given the product is dangerous and the mfg is downplaying the risks which can make people think it is safer than it really is. The fact they ship reviewers KN95 masks, basically all their sift bins broke, their fan filter is undersized and will clog rapidly over time, ... I would fully support them and even buy one if they actually said how dangerous the powder is even if it is "non-toxic".
@@EDesigns_FLI hate to break it to you... But more than half Kickstarters don't even have a prototype. This is way further than the majority of Kickstarters
I see that being achieved by taking some notes from laser printing (2D). Think about it; Laser printers electrically charge a cylinder with the desired image, then only the printing material (toner) is attracted to the print surface (paper) Note: this description is simplified
just like these days my 3D printer can do the same, except i have to help it every time and prob spend as much time trying to keep the automatic functions working as i would take doing it manually
We bought a Formlabs fuse SLS machine at work. At first we were like OMG NO SUPPORTS NEEDED then you spend 1h cleaning the parts and understand that if it doesn't need support it's because the cake is really tought. Then you spend more time cleaning everything and if you don't have an antistatic vacuum cleaner be careful to not be jolted by static discharges. But yes the parts are great! Selling this machine at this price is a feat in itself, but selling it for "enthusiasts" is a bit optimistic. Once you dealt with the hassle of post-processing a SLS part, you do realise that many parts are best produced on a cheaper FDM machine that doesn't need a special vacuum cleaner and a sandblasting machine on top of that. It will fit well for small companies, educational institutions, and some "heavy enthusiasts". Let's hope that it will force other actors to take a better look at their pricing, too!
4 หลายเดือนก่อน
I have the exact same thoughts, we also have a Fuse1 and it is a great machine but the hole SLS processing is very time and labour expensive. You also need the the blaster and compressor and vacuum system all in all not for consumer!
If I was selling parts, I'd absolutely spring for this printer. And yes, this project is very much in the spirit of the original kickstarter, they're taking a huge risk themselves and need money to reach the finish line, for people who believe in SLS and them, this is a wonderful project to bet on.
Your safety concerns are warranted, and I'm glad that you made such a strong point about it. SLS truly feels suitable only for those who have the appropriate space and equipment to manage volatile and aerosolizable materials
Well, there were about 15 minutes between me finding out about this printer and finding out that it has been canceled and all information in the video has been rendered obsolete :/
Yeah it doesnt feel good. Im glad they got what they wanted in being purchased by a larger company... but like.... I cant wait to hear that formlabs is going to charge more....
I think a more useful comparison than a kilogram of filament vs. a kilogram of powder would be "What's the minimum I need to spend to get a kilogram of parts" because I think that's not nearly as close as they present here.
There's a minimum powder required to get started(fill the build chamber) and then the efficiency of the power usage. Assuming every print job you complete has a print density of greater than 30%, theoretically you get 1kg of parts from 1kg of powder forever. The reality is that about 3-8% of the powder goes to waste with each print job. That's through poor initial cleaning(more powder sandblasted off instead of being recycled) and spillage(there will always be some mess moving stuff around) Judging by the size of the build volume, I'm going to guess around 3kg for a full build volume. The Fuse 1 and Fuse 1+ build chamber requires about 7Kg for a full build volume.
There's no point buying a printer if your usage for the entire lifetime of the printer is only a kilogram's worth of prints. Realistically, one fill of the chamber should be treated like part of the printer's purchase cost, and then it's only the powder consumed by a print (including waste) that counts as the per-part cost
I love the statement about 3D printing that "complexity is free" its what the Production course in my Industrial Design Engineering study program taught me as well
It’s not entirely true though once you dig a little deeper. Prints can fail and the more complex they are the more likely they will be to fail. When just looking at one off items and not considering any failures then complexity is free. Also post processing is more complex for complex models and hence takes longer, again complexity is not free. SLS parts needing media blasted is a good example of this, the more complex the model the harder it will be to post process, especially if you have print in place mechanisms that you need to find a way to get the powder out of. Looking at other forms of 3D printing complexity is also not free when you have to add supports to support your complex models, especially when you get that complex that you have to use dissolvable supports. So complexity being free is not true, it can cost more in terms of time or money, it is however much cheaper than other manufacturing processes which may not even be able to produce your part.
What a very thorough set of questions you managed to ask! I am also impressed with the knowledge and openness of Luke when it comes to the functionality and features of these printers. I do not think this is the consumer level device yet but it is an important step into achieving something we can all own.
The idea of home SLS printing is really attractive, but all the post processing and material handling is such a huge issue. It feels like this sort of thing is really much more suited for people running a business or maybe in a maker space where the whole build volume can be used and maybe a hand full of people run it and do the post processing in a specific room. I would also be curious about bioplastics and biodegradable materials for something like this to cut down on the microplastics issues for home use.
Using biodegradable materials would certainly help with the pollution problems, however one of the nice things about SLS is the increased strength of the parts, and I don't know of too many biodegradable plastics with high tensile strength.
@@ZeeLobby The post processing area for resin is much smaller. The whole media blaster cabinet needed for SLS is going to take up a lot of space. There may be other ways of accomplishing that step in finishing, such as a tumbler or something like that. But it is an extra step. As far as material handling, that is a bit of a pick your poison, but at least resin won't spread from a slight breeze.
@@mintzbuck depends on the size of prints. A desktop booth that can fit anything the micron produces honestly isn't that large. Takes up the same amount of space as a separate wash and cure station. I only say this cause I already own one and resin printers.
I have no need or plans to get one of these, but I really wish Micronics well. I love the idea of a company like this shaking up the industry and redefining what the price point can be for SLS.
Packing the build volume is actually rather complex if you're looking for dimensional accuracy. Parts too close together can cause "creep" of the heat and make the melted areas creep towards each other. For real precision you also want the laser scan time per layer to be rather uniform, which helps maintain uniform temperature deformation. Lastly, for very fine details you still need to take into account the wavelength of the laser. Prime example is small holes, where even a single pass may cause enough creep to close the hole.
That was another big innovation that Stefan didn't go into detail: the Micronics software uses common game engine software to take your objects, give them a minimal 3d buffer, and stack them into the print volume efficiently and quickly. You could pack it better manually but developing the UI software and performing the packing at peak efficiency would take them many months longer and ends up even more proprietary.
@@TaconiteableYup. A quick and dirty method would be to just add an invisible “force field” or non-printing volume around the outer surface of the parts, so everything has a minimum distance between everything, so that heat soak is minimised. You could algorithmically determine this distance based on time spent printing each layer and the heat conduction rate, and the power used in each layer and dynamically vary this boundary layer thickness… but it’s probably unnecessary, and a fixed distance would be fine, if slightly less efficient
I know your final question was meant as a joke, but it could theoretically be possible to print in tin with this. Has a 236 celcius melting point, and a much sharper melting point than nylon. Also has better thermal conductivity so will cool faster after the laser has passed, but might be too runny and maybe too high surface tension when molten
What I always miss in the reviews of this machine, is the safety aspect (which you luckily address). Super fine powder requires a lot of preparation, I would even only want to use it in a fume-hood or something. Or very isolated in a dedicated, super ventilated space. Which makes it not really a "home" printer.
The 3D Printing content on youtube draws FAR too many 'safety' concerns. Nylon is literally used in just about every implantable medical device, because it is just about as inert as a material can be. Nearly anything you could come into contact with, in any fabrication environment, is more harmful. Breathing tons of dust particles is bad no matter what they are made from, so use a p100 or N95 mask while handling the powder and you are protected. They look like they do dust control well in addition. You need to media blast the objects, and chances are if you have a media blaster, you know to not breathe in all the aerosolized blast media that is far worse than nylon. If not, there is no fixing stupid. Either way, do your thing, let any dust settle, and keep a clean workspace. The human body is insanely resilient to small exposures to tons of things that are harmful in huge doses. In nearly every case, we find that exposures at reasonable levels have no measurable effect on health or longevity. This is true for everything from VOCs and fine particulates, to ionizing radiation. Until you exceed a reasonable exposure limit, we have identified zero harms. For substances where this is less true (where the acceptable limits are very low) like asbestos, heavy metals, etc., we basically have banned any application where meaningful exposure is even possible. The excess 'safety' concern in 3D printing TH-cam content has annoyed me for a while. The Q1 pro reviews that mentioned that the chamber heater could be dangerous if you stuck a conductor through the heater shield while the printer was in operation were too much. This is true. I can also think of about 1000 other ways you could get hurt doing equally stupid things with consumer equipment. 3D printers are tools and probably the tools most tolerant of user stupidity. But yet the TH-cam 3D printing channels act like anything that isn't 100% tolerant of user stupidity is a huge safety concern. It is like folks complaining about the electric shock hazard of US plugs. It exists, sure, and yet if you eliminated it completely, you wouldn't have a noticeable effect on US all-cause mortality. Safety has to be a likelihood vs danger vs benefit analysis. Folks who can't do that analysis, should learn how to or stay away from anything more dangerous than baby toys. We all drive for heaven's sake.
I wouldn't ever use an SLS machine in the same house my kids grow up in. Fine powders are very dangerous. Micro plastics are an emerging issue as well.
@@JOEDHIGGINS Sure, I agree, but glossing over it or not mentioning at all is at the other end of the spectrum in my opinion. If you use this machine without any protection or cleanup (which people are going to do, especially if not mentioned) it's not going to be pleasant on your lungs, as inert as it might be. Just like open laser systems people have no clue about, it's worth at least having a caution. I do agree that safety is very complex and you need to know about before going wild about it for sure. People are driving indeed, that doesn't mean much in other situations and we're not particular great in that either.
@@WheatMillington I take form that that you check your tire pressure and tread wear remaining weekly at minimum, inspect your seatbelts for wear and fraying regularly? You could always do all the work in your garage. I grew up using all manner of woodworking tools (table saws, lathes, band saws, etc.) No lasting harm and a lot of good came from it. Definitely some risk, but I am better for it. How many parents let their children be basically lethargic or sit around on devices all day every day. Far more harmful than potential exposure to an appropriately managed risk. My shop now has all the same woodworking tools, plus welding, machining, fabrication, blacksmithing and CNC. Should I make sure to keep my children from any of these definitely deadly and dangerous tools? Or just maybe teach them to use them properly. And manage risk.
@@VincentGroenewold Sure. Be cautious and manage risk, but if you spend thousands on an industrial CNC tool and don't read, do any research, or look at the warning label on the side of the container of raw material, I have essentially no sympathy for the outcomes you get.
*Will you continue to build the Micron?* While our mission to bring industrial-quality SLS to a much wider audience remains unchanged, we will not be continuing to work on Micron and will instead be integrating our ideas and research into Formlabs’ development roadmap.
I've gotten a lot of SLS parts made professionally for work. IMO they LOOK more like production parts but resin is more accurate for functional parts. Long, high aspect ratio holes and shafts (>20:1) tend to unavoidably warp and be inaccurate with SLS. Small features (
im preety sure that is not a problem of sls but from your part maker. For example der8auer has used sls to make a custom water system for a laptop with extremly small fins etc.
Love the work these guys have done to kick down the barrier to SLS, hope they succeed and it ushers in further evolution in the SLS space. Reminds me somewhat of the story of resin 3D printing being blown open by the use of simple LCD panels and a UV lamp. Clearly as far as the hobby market goes it's only for the relatively well-heeled although there are plenty of people out there happy to drop $3k to $5k on a Prusa XL so it's not as if no-one can afford it.
What about the time needed to print? One of the biggest downsides of standard FDM printing is the time taken. If you need to completely fill the SLS print volume in order to be economical, does that mean it takes multiple days to finish the print? Or is it a few hours?
One accidental advantage of FDM is you get your polymer chains lined up as the model is built. Obviously not isotropic, yet I bet it's stronger along the extrusion paths than something fused from a fine powder. Would be nice to see a bench test tho, maybe I'm wrong. For now I'm quite happy with how my tactically positioned parts work together to make really resilient mechanisms, pretty close to what you would expect with injection molding. Metal SLS sounds more sensible, there you don't rely on larger molecular structures, as long as the powder fuses properly, it can be as good or even better than cast parts.
I do wonder if it would be possible to create filament from this powder. If not directly then maybe using SLS to print pellets like are currently used to make filament. Of course this wouldn’t be practical but it would be a way to test the strength of the material when it is printed using SLS and FDM. As you say FDM can be very strong if the parts are designed for FDM printing with the best possible print orientation.
That glass cantilever screen needs to have plastic laminated to it so when it pops it doesn’t ruin your powder or cause injury . I worked with pinball machines and when pulling out the glass it had to be supported, if you didn’t the cantilever would stress tempered glass to much and you would get an explosion. I saw 3 pinballs ruined from careless service guys or arcade staff when cleaning the glass and moving a jammed ball.
They should make a desktop tumbler with built in filter and conduit to attach a vacuum for a less messy initial removal of unsintered material which collects and can easily be poured back into the machine for reuse then a media blaster that uses the same nylon powder to blast any remaining nylon powder off the print, then that powder can be reused as it has not been contaminated with blasting media. If the main concern with reusing "used" powder is the larger lumps ruining the surface quality and interfering with structural integrity, perhaps "used" powder could be milled back to a powder via a mechanical grinder?
So much respect for Stephan for admitting that even FDM printing can be hazardous for your health. So many creators in this space completely ignore the health risks associated with FDM printers and so many in the community are in denial because of this.
The health risks of FDM are relatively minor as long as you stick to the most common materials, like PLA. If you need to print any chemically nastier filaments like ABS, nylon, PC, PVDF, etc. then you really need to take safety precautions, like making sure your room is well ventilated and ideally the printer is filtered.
I just realized the Colorado PCB assembly booth next to micronics. That’s so kind since they helped William Osman (organizer of open sauce) finish his pcbs in time for the mrbeast squid game
It's literally a laser printer except the toner cartridge is open to the air and you have to dig through it. If you've ever messed with laser toner you'll understand. I can't imagine, haha. It's cool technology but the *main* reason I would want SLS is for printing metal. Maybe some day before I die.
We have been using and researching SLS at work for around 20 years, and to be honest, I don't see it as a viable hobby technology due to mess, material cost, complexity, cleaning post process, and energy requirements, but this looks great for a small business use. I wish them all the best
Yeah it seems SLS won’t be ready for hobby use anytime soon. For it to be ready for home use it would need to be a fully enclosed system. You give it your model to print and it spits out a finished and post processed part. What do you think of their safety advice about using the printer?
This video was a great explanation of SLS, I learned a lot about the process and this cool printer. I think you asked great questions and I can't wait to see this method of printing become more accessible like FDM printing has.
Thank you for another fantastic video! This video gets into more of the important details than any other video on this printer. I'd love to have one, but I think it's definitely not for everyone due to safety and mess issues as you mentioned. The same as any machine using powder based printing. Hopefully it will be a hit, and over the next couple versions they will develop more safety related additions. But I think it will always be a bit risky and messy just because of all that powder. It's definitely not for the average person.
I really hope they have a organization method for parts that lays them as flat as possible, therefore allowing the bed to be as thin as possible and use less powder, opposed to a talk tower and more leftover powder….. I like it though!!!!
I used to work for one of the largest SLS 3D printing bureaus in the country i reside. Having not enough virgin powder can also cause a pool of plastic to form during the print process. It's not pretty or easy to resolve. We used to use a 1:1 virgin to used ratio.
I've seen videos on TH-cam of diode laser cutters marking and cutting transparent materials just fine. What the owners do is they place a black piece of card stock underneath the material that is being cut or marked. This also means the card stock has a cool pattern etched into it that can be framed as a secondary art product.
Great video. I am excited to see this technology coming down in price. I personally don't have a use for this type of machine but it is still really cool to see none the less and I hope it is successful.
It would be advised to upgrade the laser to 10-15W one to reduce the general temperatur of the unused powder . It helps reusability and the cleaning of the parts.
Hope they address the hazard of the combustible dust. Tpu especially. Lofted in air it can kick off with static spark. Need proper grounding. And for more advanced materials inerting the chamber is necessary
Their high speed fan filter unit thing is super dangerous on the combustible dust front one mistake and you could have the cake in the exhaust airstream and loft the entire chamber worth of dust into the air where it very easily could find an ignition source. Normally the post processing is done with vaccum filtration systems where the exhaust is dispersed so that there is no risk of that happenning. None of their post processing equipment looks even remotely ESD/anti-static either so the powder is just going to go all over the place.
project looks great, dudes seem knowledgeable but 8 Months from pre-production design to shipped product is extreeeemly optimistic. just the pilot production run, testing and improving for volume production alone will take them a good 3 months if they already have their supply chain completely figured out. wish them best of luck to pull it off though! I'd love to have an SLS printer but I don't trust myself to handle the powder in a way that would not harm my family and me.
Just maybe don't have kids playing in the same room with ANY printer? Do you blame the maker of your resin printer if your kid drinks from post-process jug?
@@woldemunster9244 don't hallucinate about what I said! I'm merely stating that I will not mess with SOME technologies like nuclear fission, chemistry involving Arsenic or DIY submarines - even if I'd love to. Not saying it's not safe to so, if you know what you're doing and if you're meticulous about the process but I will pass.
Carbon fiber reinfocred powder? How it suppose to work? Regular filaments has relatively long fibers which reinforce the print. How long fibers in powder? Not really long I think.
Well it seems to work well enough but even they said themselves that there's room for improvement and I can imagine having other types of powders is something they're gonna have to do just like how 3d printers started out with worse filaments than now
Carbon fibre "reinforced" filaments are actually weaker and more brittle. This exact channel has plenty of videos showing this fact. The fibre lengths are no where near long enough for the plastic matrix to effectively tranfer stress to the fibres to bear. The carbon fibre in these filaments has such a small length:diameter rario it's effectively just a particulate, and acts like an impurity, not a reinforcing fibre.
It just makes it even more toxic and weaker random chopped fibers don't improve strength they can make a part more rigid but you typically lose out on strength and toughness by gaining some in the surface wearing properties. Basically its only strong where the fiber rubs against something but the bulk is now swiss cheese with either glass or carbon dust in it.
I remember when FDM 3d printers were thousands of dollars. Now I can pick up an ender 3 for $200, or a better FDM printer for two or three times that. Maybe when I'm old I'll be able to buy an SLS printer cheap.
Even for regular plastic prints, SLS would be a game changer. Supports are horrible right now. Having SLA quality, with FDM strengths, with supports easier than PVA to deal with, makes it amazing.
Interesting thought but I think most people printing at this level already know of that limitation because that's not unique to just SLS, liquid resin printing already has the same issue (although it would be way more impactful on SLS depending on shape but it's the same issue still)
@@LanceThumping If you don't use drain holes, I'd argue it's much worse for SLA because the trapped resin is likely to burst out from the trapped volume, splattering resin in places where it probably doesn't belong. As little as you might want either SLS powder or SLA resin on/in you, I suspect that enclosed volumes of powder are less dangerous than enclosed volumes of resin. If you use drain holes with resin, you either have to put them in an unimportant location or weld plugs into the holes. I'd assume the same would be true for SLS, though plugging the drain holes would be more challenging.
I'd like to know what the strength of the nylon parts are compared to FDM printed PLA. I assume that there would be a reasonable difference in strength.
How much of the cost of a commercial SLS print job is the machine time vs the powder or operator time? I don't really want an SLS in my basement but would like to be able to send out SLS jobs nearer the cost of an FDM print.
Really cool for a dedicated shop 👌 I kind of wish the build volume was smaller though so it could use less power and also lower the price, especially in early development
I don’t know if making it smaller would lower the price all that much, all the main components would need to remain the same, laser, auger, etc. If you made it smaller than likely all you could save would be in using a smaller heater and a smaller recoater (which is just a rubber blade). All the expensive parts would stay the same.
i share safety concerns especially with the "desktop" label which invoked the idea of it milling away in any old room. this is most certainly a shed/garage/etc type machine; a place you expect to get dusty and make relevant precautions.
If you have dust accumulation from this printer your about one step away from a dust explosion. The area around the printer has to be keep immaculate even if it always gets covered in a fine layer of dust after use you must always clean up afterwards. Failure to clean up after a spill or regular use is literally a road to disaster. I would not want this kind of dust mixing with metal/wood dusts either that probably has all sorts of unpredictable combintations of danger.
So as a Fuse1 owner, that powder cleaning setup is absolutely not going to be sufficient. ;-) Even with Formlabs' Sift cleaning station (with a giant filter and suction system) powder *still* sneaks out everywhere just at every step once it's out of the printer... Doing that kind of cleaning in an open container as shown will be a HUGE mess after a couple prints. (Especially since you need to brush the partially sintered powder somewhat aggressively-- it doesn't just fall away loose like with MultiJet Fusion or EOS powders.) I'm also a little skeptical of the claims for supporting PA+CF powder as I believe that would really require an inert atmosphere in the machine. I can see a lot of print problems in their sample parts (possibly just from powder that was reused too many times or with too low of refresh rate), but for an entire printer that costs about as much as just the build chamber for the Fuse1... Might be worth a shot!
I really hope they have massive success with this, not because I backed it, but because I'm waiting for the gen 3 or even gen 4 machine, when the kinks have been worked out. I have serious doubts about the safety of this machine in the hands of "typical" end users. An N95 mask really isn't enough. This machine needs to be limited to enclosed spaces away from living spaces, because there IS going to be dust getting everywhere, and despite nylon being non-toxic, the fine particulate itself poses a physical risk to your lungs. Hopefully with future iterations this can be better addressed. I also hope that they have done their research on manufacturing. There is no doubt that in order to get the machines manufactured to sell at this price point, they will be using a Chinese factory, and manufacturing in China comes with a lot of caveats. Most factories over there will make undocumented changes to your parts if you don't stand over them micromanaging everything, and this can have pretty serious results. It really is necessary to have someone in the factory working directly for you, not the factory ensuring that quality is maintained and there are no changes being made to your specification.
I wonder about where to get the powder. I can get resin or filament from Amazon or my local Microcenter. Does their powder come from them? If they go out of business will I never get more powder?
You can buy the powder from many sources its the same stuff industrial printers use. Just be aware the powder is in fact toxic due to it being an intert but ultrafine powder. (Contrary to what the mfg says the SLS process is very dangerous if you don't follow all the best practices)
I think they are where Sinterit was 10 years ago. I would stick to proven brands and wait out on this for a a couple of years at least until all reliability issues have been worked out.
Thanks for the great video and input they seem to have done something incredible. And you still asked great questions. However your critique regarding production: kickstarter was never meant to be able to buy a finished perfect product. So the idea that money/funding is given to support their idea should retain the highest priority, not having a perfectly refined mass produce product imo Danke fürs zuhören :)
I think there are plenty of people who use resin printers improperly and spend far more than 4k without understanding the risks. SLS printers can cause long term toxic powder buildup it could literally spread itself around a building slowly giving people around lung cancer in the long run. The mfg could be much more clear that to fit the budget all safety items are the user's responsiblity and provide a clear list of required items for any standard procedure including spill handling.
I own a Sintratec SLS kit for 5K USD/EUR. The biggest issue is closed software code or microcontroller hardware. it's really off-putting when you can fix or tweak the process, especially on something delivered as a kit. The worst aspect of SLS is the non-uniform pre-heating of the powder. Any reflection of the IR halogen bulbs on the chamber walls does lead to spot being hotter than others. Some areas will melt and clog up the slider distributing the powder ruining your prints in progress. other areas will not get hot enough to properly melt and solidify. not bond properly. Also, fine tuning of the unused material not caking up gets hard, ramping up excessive deterioration of the powder. You would need to access the sensor reads and tweak them in code, both of the slicer and the microcontroller level. Which you cannot do if it's not fully open source. in the case of my Sintratec kit it isn't, so I would have to design a board and software from scratch. I resorted to black super high heat resistant paint to cover the chamber walls and reduce reflections. However this interferes with the powder slider operations and the microswitches controlling the endstop positions, as these are not heat resitant enough. It's tricky to find and source better reliable heat resistant switches or come up with simple solutions. In the end of it I use other techniques than SLS and still do most prints on a single extruder FDM Ender 6 machine. I only needed a set of a dozen small hydrodynamic surfaces FDM could do from that machine. Eventually using a second FDM machine with a dual extruder would be the better option. The only advantage of any truly open source SLS machione would be the functional parts nylon PA12 can achieve. In FDM this si the realm of carbon fibre enhanced filaments and Sinter metal FDM filaments used in conjunction with washable support materials. The powder cost and especially the powder waste is exceptionally high. Actually without very delicate tweaking all the powder in the chamber is lost once exposed to to the IR light heating process. I would tend say more laser power in the 15 W range is better as you do not have to preheat uniformly very close to the melting point. 5 W isn't really does enough for getting the job done properly. Light reflections in the build chamber do cause way too much uneven heating of the thin top layer of powder. Throwing multiple parts into the chamber isn't such a great idea either. Many parts will warp and any of them might cause a failed print. it's near impossible, even from recorded video footage, to discern which print largely submerged did cause the slider to crash into such a warped part or dislocated part. So maximizing your build chamber utilization is really workable either unless you have super good heat mangement and can tweak it in open source accessible stuff. On the other hand providers don't want to be liable for you tweaking high power laser gear. So very likely the stuff you need to get at is locked down. Also working with lasers is highly dangerous. For me it's just a few burned rubber gloves so far, even when being super cautious. You don't see laser light path. Also the Sintratec machine needs mirror cleaning and significantly had to improve ventilation flow and filtering to make it work more reliably. The Micronics filter system looks more serious but I would have to look at the specific machine before deciding to buy / not buy one. As modifying filters would impact the exposure timing, heat management and heat tuning I would also insist on a fully open source accessible platform in both software slicer suite as well as in microcontroller access you are no likely to get here. Managing poweder as a desktop printer is impossible. This is only suitable for dusty workshops. I use a cyklone filter on a shopvac. Then build a powder sieve for recycling powder from a 100 micorn lab sieve, ikea boxes a few springs and an old swing grinder. Only to be used outddors. I also build myself a sandblasting chamber and bought a compressor. The need for accessories is high and needs to be factiored into the price. I would skip on the their sieve and directly sandblast the cake recovered from the chamber. Sieve the excess powder after. keep in mind it is questionable if you can reuse it after heating. Again, you would only get a working powder economy if you have full access to the source code of the temperature management. Also posititioning and access to the IT sensor signal is key. Huge difference if that IR sensor scopes black melted or grey unmelted plastics in the previous layer. Another thing you want access to understand what the machine is failing at. Stuff likely not exposed by any closed shop software you may be ending up to being to tied to for good or bad. I hope this gives you a much better SLS insider idea what you are betting 3k plus bucks onto.
The fine detail quality depends more on x/y resolution not the spot size itself. The spot size only limits the size of the most thin walls and parts. So fine details should still be possible like on resin printers or like "fuzzy skin" on FDM-prints with 0.4mm nozzle can produce much smaller details - in theory.
It depends heavily on both spot size and X/Y resolution depending on what you are printing. When printing large parts spot size doesn’t matter much but when printing thin or detailed parts spot size matters a lot. Just look at the difference between 0.2 mm nozzle FDM prints and resin prints, the FDM print will not look as good despite possibly having the same X/Y resolution. A 0.25 mm spot size means that any outside sharp edge or corner will have a 0.25 mm fillet applied to it.
@@conorstewart2214 as I said - the spot size limits the size of parts, but not the fine details (of larger objects above 3x spotsize, as bigger as no matter)
I definitely don't think SLS can have as far a reach as FDM printing for the health reasons you mentioned, but having it be more financially accessible would definitely help it be utilized by those that might not have been able to otherwise
Iv mentioned this on another channel reviewing this machine, but i wonder if making the media a slurry would help in the handling department? It should make dust a non issue, and the right fluid shouldn't interfere with the fusing of the particles or be effected by the heat. You obviously dont want ot bouling off or creating pockets in the part. But im also thinking about thermoset plastics in general, something that comes in a liquid or gel form, a lot like photoresin, and sets permanently with heat. Invista has a thermoset nylon thats being developed, and i wonder if that would be suitable for an SLS type system?
A slurry would definitely interfere with the fusing the laser would first have to evaporate whatever is making it a liquid slurry which would create a vapor expansion which would throw the hot bit of plastic around making a total mess. If you had a heat curing resin you effectively would just have an upside down resin printer which do exist the other problem with a liquid/slurry is it wouldn't provide enough support to make the prints support less.
It's really ingenius in many ways, even if there are some hiccups. The slicer especially. Just needs some more thought to post processing, such as recycling used nylon powder. Post processing SLS prints is a major hassle in my experience. At least without something like you get with the Formlabs Fuse 1 setup (downdraft table, vacuum, air blaster, etc).
They should put modular chambers to manage the space more efficiently. if you have smaller parts to produce, you can use a smaller chamber to save your material.
Based on an extra chamber being over $1000, it would not be cheap to have multiple build chambers of different sizes. You are probably cheaper just trying to make sure that you use as much volume as possible.
@@conorstewart2214 I think your price estimation is not accurate. I said modular meaning it's a housing you can be placed and removed on the already build chamber. given the entire chamber is hitted up using light, no need for even hitting element for the smaller chamber. all it needs is to deposit the powder inside the smaller chamber rather than the entire bed.
Where did they find Nylon 12 for 80$/kg? A quick google gives me 100$/kg (140$/kg in Canada) Since the parts are full fill, it will use more material for a similar part. (also stuck material on the part) You might lose material if over heated or overused. Adding the post processing (you can't batch process the blasting part), the printed parts will be a lot more expensive. (I read that a print takes a long time and you also have to wait for the powder to cool down for many hours...) (can you use an ultrasonic cleaner to batch post process the parts?) I need more info on durability of the printed parts and the machine itself. (edits)
Hey Stefan, I’ve had a Sinterit Lisa X for two years and finally returned it due to constant problems. Given the engineering/cost/experience of this machine vs Micronics’ I have serious concerns not mention here. Let me know and I can share that with you if you want.
interesting that it only uses a 5 W diode laser, i did some research in cheap desktop laser cutting a while ago for a friend of my father. 20 Watts is about the average for a cheap laser desktop cutter
I like the idea of SLS printer, but the clean up is main reservation I have. My designs would have multiple delicate pieces, that could be a pain to clean.
There is a place for all manufacturing technologies. SLS is very cool, but no additive process comes close to FDM/FFF in terms of ready to use parts right off the build plate. Can open-source kick start an SLS revolution?
Honestly I'm skeptical that SLS can be made anywhere near as convenient, whereas FDM continues to improve rapidly. Even the isotropic properties can be just about achieved with the right choice of filament (less commonly used filaments like polypropylene fuse between layers much more strongly and so layer adhesion is much less of an issue, and better materials in the future will likely improve that for more conventional choices as well).
I had a thought. Figured this would be a good place to post as Stefan @cnckitchen does a lot of good testing. Would the results of preforming tensile, and other strength tests on a single strand of unused filament have a linear correlation with printed parts of the same material? If there was any correlation, preliminary new filament tests could be done quickly. I realize there’s some tests that required rigid pieces. Just a thought:)
You don't mention power: I would imagine all that heat requirement means a much higher power consumption versus FDM. It's amazing to have another technology for 3D printing, but this seems a niche method better suited for production than prototyping.
Sold out to Formlabs, almost had a option for consumers to have a SLS printer without breaking the bank. Thanks formlab for killing that dream.
They are probably going have best sleep in along time after the deal is over.
yeah im kinda mad too, i knew theyd just kill the project. shame
We need a boycott of form labs
Guys there is an diy option totally open source!!
Blame the sell outs.
the physics simulation to pack models into the printing volume made me think about how some chaos is often needed to avoid local minima, and actually find the most efficient/stable configuration
if they haven't already, they should make sure to add a function to vibrate the simulation, as that might help it pack models more efficiently into the volume.
You can manually grab individual models and shake them, causing the settling you're talking about
@@maj429 yeah but that's not really the same thing, and also quite fiddly.
lol the physics engine for Unreal Engine is called Chaos
I mean in practice is pretty easy. And imo way easier than trying to algorithmically maximize it
Ironically, the physics system in UE5 meant to replace PhysX is actually called Chaos lol
AAAAND is gone..
Lmao
They sold out to form-labs, that was a quick aquire to stop people from having a cost effect option for SLS.
@MattBruman wow, we need a boycott of form labs
A company called ALLshape makes €5995 SLS 3D printers. They are already for sale, I believe it’s a Dutch company. I ordered a sample and got a nut and bolt shipped to me for free, great looking and working part. Soon as I got my shed built I’ll order one of those.
@@Spaxxist thank you so mich for the suggestion, I just ordered my sample as well thanks to you, I will come back to give my impressions.
While it’s true that you don’t need supports for SLS, you do have some design constraints to consider. For example, hollow objects need drain holes to allow the powder to escape. You also have process considerations, which doesn’t make it exactly enthusiast friendly. That said, I really want these guys to succeed and it’s amazing to finally see some more competition in this space.
Good point!
I have found with the Formlabs products that orientation absolutely affects the finished product. I can look at a part from any of our Fuse or Fuse 1+ printers and tell you what orientation it was printed in.
@@93Martin with 0.25 mm spot size and 0.1 mm layer height that would be about the quality of a FDM printer with a small nozzle so it’s not surprising that you can still tell it’s print orientation and potentially see layer lines.
Also some parts shown would be a pain to post process. On their cube example with all the different mechanisms, they show a ball joint, getting all the powder out of the ball joint would be a nightmare.
@@conorstewart2214 The resolution and layer height between SLS and FDM are worlds apart. Yes you can tell SLS prints are 3D printed but it's not in your face like FDM. You can spot FDM prints from the opposite side of the room.
This video did not age well, given the Formlabs acquisition and announcement Micron will no longer be developing this machine further.
Will they be refunding the backers or do I have a reason to hate formlabs even more?
EXACTLY my question@@TauCu
I like the enthusiasm of the young engineer during his presentation. I hope their kickstarter is successful and this becomes the new standard for 3d printing.
my last kickstarter was for some shoes that detected your movement for VR. Unfortunately, they only delivered a few pairs an abandon most of us. And so many 3d printer Kickstarters were scams from the start disappearing with peoples' money.
Kickstarter was cancelled
@@Tedlasman Really? What a shame.
@@lorenzozapaton4031 They sold themselvs to Formlabs.
Formlabs successfully prevented a cheap open SLS-printer in competiton to their $30000+ printers, securing the high margin market from makers.
Hopefully the two got rich…
@@lorenzozapaton4031 Formlabs bought them.
While I hope they succed, a few further concerns you havent pointed out from someone who has developed a SLS printer a few years back
and is working with industrial ones on a daily basis.
- Energy consumption: I think people really underestimate how much energy/costs it takes to heat a sls printer just below the melting point.
The machines typically have to be preheated for 1-2 hours to have a uniform heat distribution and
even for a small machine like this that would probably mean 2 - 3 kw/h, without even starting the print.
So this means printing just 3-4 parts as the home user typically does is kinda expensive.
- Maintenance: These machines have to be thoroughly cleaned before every print.
Not only does the powder spill everywhere, the fumes from
the process settle down everywhere and have to be constantly removed.
Warping/shrinkage: There is a reason you most of the time only see rather small parts on those exhibitions.
For lager parts you have to compensate for shinkage in all dimensions and
futhermore the shinkage/deformation may vary on every point in the chamber as
the parts cool down diffrently in regards to their position.
Energy? The price of kWh is only about 5 cents. So in the big picture it´s nothing imo
The average price is $0.17/kwh in the us@@alexanderj4545
Finally someone else who agrees that this isn't for everyone. Love this video, love the SLS process, but not for everyone. I've been in weeks of trainings to get certifications with the HP MJF and various SLS processes. They also make no mention of the explosion proof vacuums and grounding of the machines properly.
You see similar issues in toner based copiers/Presses. Microfine particles and static are a bad combination.
Def way worse with metallic powders. Threat of fir or blast is probably pretty minimal if you follow the directions right and don't play let it snow with the powder.
They don't need explosion proof vaccums or grounding to be mentioned becuase their post processing stations and machines are explosion proof vacuums which are massively oversized and are extremely grounded and probably won't even turn on if they are not properly grounded (for industrial Selective Laser Sintering SLS). HP MJF (Multijet Fusion) uses liquid binders so you don't run into the powder hazard problems.
@@riakata not all powder can be contained. And so much of the HP builds aren't melted together. Having worked with HP for a couple years and am certified in the process it can still be a mess. No matter how much the powder recovery stations try.
Also: While nylon may be non toxic, anything with a fine enough particle size is considered carcinogenic!
Fantastic video breaking down exactly what they are doing. I have a unit on hand and should have a video up late next week on it. But this really is the perfect example of who exactly should be using Kickstarter as a platform to launch something new & innovative to the market
I disagree with you about this being a "perfect example" for Kickstarter. Kickstarter is intended to get a developed product into production. This product is still in testing and is inundated with unresolved problems. They're still having problems reliably feeding material into the build chamber. This product hasn't gotten out of alpha testing and is nowhere near ready for beta testing. Kickstarter funds are supposed to be used for getting a product into production. They are not supposed to be squandered on developing and testing something that one day might make it into production.
I think this isn't suitable for kickstarter given the product is dangerous and the mfg is downplaying the risks which can make people think it is safer than it really is. The fact they ship reviewers KN95 masks, basically all their sift bins broke, their fan filter is undersized and will clog rapidly over time, ... I would fully support them and even buy one if they actually said how dangerous the powder is even if it is "non-toxic".
@@riakataAgreed and well said, coming from someone who works with carbon black.
finaly something actually using kickstarter the right way
@@EDesigns_FLI hate to break it to you... But more than half Kickstarters don't even have a prototype. This is way further than the majority of Kickstarters
I bet future consumer SLS will print, sift, reclaim, and blast automatically. Doesn't feel unachievable even with current tech.
Agreed, I think consumer SLS will have to be similar to formlabs system. Completely enclosed at every step.
I see that being achieved by taking some notes from laser printing (2D). Think about it; Laser printers electrically charge a cylinder with the desired image, then only the printing material (toner) is attracted to the print surface (paper)
Note: this description is simplified
In another video, they did an office tour one of their first prototypes it looked like they tried to do the sifting all in one unit.
just like these days my 3D printer can do the same, except i have to help it every time and prob spend as much time trying to keep the automatic functions working as i would take doing it manually
@@TheOfficialOriginalChad the problem then is it defeats one of the major benefits of SLS no? You’d be required to have supports.
We bought a Formlabs fuse SLS machine at work. At first we were like OMG NO SUPPORTS NEEDED then you spend 1h cleaning the parts and understand that if it doesn't need support it's because the cake is really tought. Then you spend more time cleaning everything and if you don't have an antistatic vacuum cleaner be careful to not be jolted by static discharges.
But yes the parts are great!
Selling this machine at this price is a feat in itself, but selling it for "enthusiasts" is a bit optimistic. Once you dealt with the hassle of post-processing a SLS part, you do realise that many parts are best produced on a cheaper FDM machine that doesn't need a special vacuum cleaner and a sandblasting machine on top of that.
It will fit well for small companies, educational institutions, and some "heavy enthusiasts". Let's hope that it will force other actors to take a better look at their pricing, too!
I have the exact same thoughts, we also have a Fuse1 and it is a great machine but the hole SLS processing is very time and labour expensive. You also need the the blaster and compressor and vacuum system all in all not for consumer!
If I was selling parts, I'd absolutely spring for this printer. And yes, this project is very much in the spirit of the original kickstarter, they're taking a huge risk themselves and need money to reach the finish line, for people who believe in SLS and them, this is a wonderful project to bet on.
Your safety concerns are warranted, and I'm glad that you made such a strong point about it. SLS truly feels suitable only for those who have the appropriate space and equipment to manage volatile and aerosolizable materials
Well, there were about 15 minutes between me finding out about this printer and finding out that it has been canceled and all information in the video has been rendered obsolete :/
Yeah it doesnt feel good. Im glad they got what they wanted in being purchased by a larger company... but like.... I cant wait to hear that formlabs is going to charge more....
I read the comments immediately after watching the video 😂
I think a more useful comparison than a kilogram of filament vs. a kilogram of powder would be "What's the minimum I need to spend to get a kilogram of parts" because I think that's not nearly as close as they present here.
There's a minimum powder required to get started(fill the build chamber) and then the efficiency of the power usage. Assuming every print job you complete has a print density of greater than 30%, theoretically you get 1kg of parts from 1kg of powder forever. The reality is that about 3-8% of the powder goes to waste with each print job. That's through poor initial cleaning(more powder sandblasted off instead of being recycled) and spillage(there will always be some mess moving stuff around)
Judging by the size of the build volume, I'm going to guess around 3kg for a full build volume. The Fuse 1 and Fuse 1+ build chamber requires about 7Kg for a full build volume.
There's no point buying a printer if your usage for the entire lifetime of the printer is only a kilogram's worth of prints. Realistically, one fill of the chamber should be treated like part of the printer's purchase cost, and then it's only the powder consumed by a print (including waste) that counts as the per-part cost
$/benchy as a reference?
Using Unreal Engine and a physics simulator as a slicer is pretty creative.
Also kinda funny we can just order pure microplastics.
I love the statement about 3D printing that "complexity is free" its what the Production course in my Industrial Design Engineering study program taught me as well
It’s not entirely true though once you dig a little deeper. Prints can fail and the more complex they are the more likely they will be to fail. When just looking at one off items and not considering any failures then complexity is free. Also post processing is more complex for complex models and hence takes longer, again complexity is not free. SLS parts needing media blasted is a good example of this, the more complex the model the harder it will be to post process, especially if you have print in place mechanisms that you need to find a way to get the powder out of.
Looking at other forms of 3D printing complexity is also not free when you have to add supports to support your complex models, especially when you get that complex that you have to use dissolvable supports.
So complexity being free is not true, it can cost more in terms of time or money, it is however much cheaper than other manufacturing processes which may not even be able to produce your part.
A more truthful statement is "the costs of CNC machining don't apply to 3D printing; the costs of 3D printing do".
What a very thorough set of questions you managed to ask! I am also impressed with the knowledge and openness of Luke when it comes to the functionality and features of these printers. I do not think this is the consumer level device yet but it is an important step into achieving something we can all own.
The idea of home SLS printing is really attractive, but all the post processing and material handling is such a huge issue. It feels like this sort of thing is really much more suited for people running a business or maybe in a maker space where the whole build volume can be used and maybe a hand full of people run it and do the post processing in a specific room. I would also be curious about bioplastics and biodegradable materials for something like this to cut down on the microplastics issues for home use.
Using biodegradable materials would certainly help with the pollution problems, however one of the nice things about SLS is the increased strength of the parts, and I don't know of too many biodegradable plastics with high tensile strength.
Honestly it doesn't seem that much crazier than resin. And tons of home users use it now.
@@ZeeLobby The post processing area for resin is much smaller. The whole media blaster cabinet needed for SLS is going to take up a lot of space. There may be other ways of accomplishing that step in finishing, such as a tumbler or something like that. But it is an extra step. As far as material handling, that is a bit of a pick your poison, but at least resin won't spread from a slight breeze.
@@mintzbuck depends on the size of prints. A desktop booth that can fit anything the micron produces honestly isn't that large. Takes up the same amount of space as a separate wash and cure station. I only say this cause I already own one and resin printers.
I have no need or plans to get one of these, but I really wish Micronics well. I love the idea of a company like this shaking up the industry and redefining what the price point can be for SLS.
Hey Dan, they shook up the industry alright. Formlabs were so shook, they acquired them :(
@@JAYTEEAU Yeah. I was bummed when I saw that.
Packing the build volume is actually rather complex if you're looking for dimensional accuracy. Parts too close together can cause "creep" of the heat and make the melted areas creep towards each other. For real precision you also want the laser scan time per layer to be rather uniform, which helps maintain uniform temperature deformation.
Lastly, for very fine details you still need to take into account the wavelength of the laser. Prime example is small holes, where even a single pass may cause enough creep to close the hole.
That was another big innovation that Stefan didn't go into detail: the Micronics software uses common game engine software to take your objects, give them a minimal 3d buffer, and stack them into the print volume efficiently and quickly. You could pack it better manually but developing the UI software and performing the packing at peak efficiency would take them many months longer and ends up even more proprietary.
@ed_halley at 15:55 he talks about it
@@ed_halleyyou totally missed the point of what the comentator wanted to say. The game engine is just looking for collision nothing more
@@TaconiteableYup. A quick and dirty method would be to just add an invisible “force field” or non-printing volume around the outer surface of the parts, so everything has a minimum distance between everything, so that heat soak is minimised. You could algorithmically determine this distance based on time spent printing each layer and the heat conduction rate, and the power used in each layer and dynamically vary this boundary layer thickness… but it’s probably unnecessary, and a fixed distance would be fine, if slightly less efficient
@@mduckernz thats how other sls slicers do it today - with a fixer bounding box
Crazy how they got over 10x the donations they needed but cancelled the project and sold out...
just stumbled upon this machine on accident and now a vid from you... the day can't get better!
I know your final question was meant as a joke, but it could theoretically be possible to print in tin with this. Has a 236 celcius melting point, and a much sharper melting point than nylon. Also has better thermal conductivity so will cool faster after the laser has passed, but might be too runny and maybe too high surface tension when molten
Tin vapor is extremely toxic. Ask a welder about proper precautions when welding galvanized (tin coated) steel.
What I always miss in the reviews of this machine, is the safety aspect (which you luckily address). Super fine powder requires a lot of preparation, I would even only want to use it in a fume-hood or something. Or very isolated in a dedicated, super ventilated space. Which makes it not really a "home" printer.
The 3D Printing content on youtube draws FAR too many 'safety' concerns. Nylon is literally used in just about every implantable medical device, because it is just about as inert as a material can be. Nearly anything you could come into contact with, in any fabrication environment, is more harmful. Breathing tons of dust particles is bad no matter what they are made from, so use a p100 or N95 mask while handling the powder and you are protected.
They look like they do dust control well in addition. You need to media blast the objects, and chances are if you have a media blaster, you know to not breathe in all the aerosolized blast media that is far worse than nylon. If not, there is no fixing stupid.
Either way, do your thing, let any dust settle, and keep a clean workspace. The human body is insanely resilient to small exposures to tons of things that are harmful in huge doses. In nearly every case, we find that exposures at reasonable levels have no measurable effect on health or longevity. This is true for everything from VOCs and fine particulates, to ionizing radiation. Until you exceed a reasonable exposure limit, we have identified zero harms. For substances where this is less true (where the acceptable limits are very low) like asbestos, heavy metals, etc., we basically have banned any application where meaningful exposure is even possible.
The excess 'safety' concern in 3D printing TH-cam content has annoyed me for a while. The Q1 pro reviews that mentioned that the chamber heater could be dangerous if you stuck a conductor through the heater shield while the printer was in operation were too much. This is true. I can also think of about 1000 other ways you could get hurt doing equally stupid things with consumer equipment.
3D printers are tools and probably the tools most tolerant of user stupidity. But yet the TH-cam 3D printing channels act like anything that isn't 100% tolerant of user stupidity is a huge safety concern. It is like folks complaining about the electric shock hazard of US plugs. It exists, sure, and yet if you eliminated it completely, you wouldn't have a noticeable effect on US all-cause mortality. Safety has to be a likelihood vs danger vs benefit analysis. Folks who can't do that analysis, should learn how to or stay away from anything more dangerous than baby toys. We all drive for heaven's sake.
I wouldn't ever use an SLS machine in the same house my kids grow up in. Fine powders are very dangerous. Micro plastics are an emerging issue as well.
@@JOEDHIGGINS Sure, I agree, but glossing over it or not mentioning at all is at the other end of the spectrum in my opinion. If you use this machine without any protection or cleanup (which people are going to do, especially if not mentioned) it's not going to be pleasant on your lungs, as inert as it might be. Just like open laser systems people have no clue about, it's worth at least having a caution. I do agree that safety is very complex and you need to know about before going wild about it for sure. People are driving indeed, that doesn't mean much in other situations and we're not particular great in that either.
@@WheatMillington I take form that that you check your tire pressure and tread wear remaining weekly at minimum, inspect your seatbelts for wear and fraying regularly?
You could always do all the work in your garage. I grew up using all manner of woodworking tools (table saws, lathes, band saws, etc.) No lasting harm and a lot of good came from it. Definitely some risk, but I am better for it. How many parents let their children be basically lethargic or sit around on devices all day every day. Far more harmful than potential exposure to an appropriately managed risk.
My shop now has all the same woodworking tools, plus welding, machining, fabrication, blacksmithing and CNC. Should I make sure to keep my children from any of these definitely deadly and dangerous tools? Or just maybe teach them to use them properly. And manage risk.
@@VincentGroenewold Sure. Be cautious and manage risk, but if you spend thousands on an industrial CNC tool and don't read, do any research, or look at the warning label on the side of the container of raw material, I have essentially no sympathy for the outcomes you get.
*Will you continue to build the Micron?*
While our mission to bring industrial-quality SLS to a much wider audience remains unchanged, we will not be continuing to work on Micron and will instead be integrating our ideas and research into Formlabs’ development roadmap.
I've gotten a lot of SLS parts made professionally for work. IMO they LOOK more like production parts but resin is more accurate for functional parts. Long, high aspect ratio holes and shafts (>20:1) tend to unavoidably warp and be inaccurate with SLS. Small features (
Isn't resin supposed to be not accurate for functional parts?
im preety sure that is not a problem of sls but from your part maker. For example der8auer has used sls to make a custom water system for a laptop with extremly small fins etc.
Nice detailed comment. Bravo.
Working for a company that uses SLS for aerospace it sounds like more of a skill issue from whoever you're buying from
@@oni2inkwhere do you have that nonsense from? Resin is the most accurate consumer printing tech, period.
Love the work these guys have done to kick down the barrier to SLS, hope they succeed and it ushers in further evolution in the SLS space. Reminds me somewhat of the story of resin 3D printing being blown open by the use of simple LCD panels and a UV lamp. Clearly as far as the hobby market goes it's only for the relatively well-heeled although there are plenty of people out there happy to drop $3k to $5k on a Prusa XL so it's not as if no-one can afford it.
Don't check the latest news from these guys unless you want to be disappointed
What about the time needed to print? One of the biggest downsides of standard FDM printing is the time taken. If you need to completely fill the SLS print volume in order to be economical, does that mean it takes multiple days to finish the print? Or is it a few hours?
One accidental advantage of FDM is you get your polymer chains lined up as the model is built. Obviously not isotropic, yet I bet it's stronger along the extrusion paths than something fused from a fine powder. Would be nice to see a bench test tho, maybe I'm wrong.
For now I'm quite happy with how my tactically positioned parts work together to make really resilient mechanisms, pretty close to what you would expect with injection molding. Metal SLS sounds more sensible, there you don't rely on larger molecular structures, as long as the powder fuses properly, it can be as good or even better than cast parts.
I do wonder if it would be possible to create filament from this powder. If not directly then maybe using SLS to print pellets like are currently used to make filament. Of course this wouldn’t be practical but it would be a way to test the strength of the material when it is printed using SLS and FDM.
As you say FDM can be very strong if the parts are designed for FDM printing with the best possible print orientation.
That glass cantilever screen needs to have plastic laminated to it so when it pops it doesn’t ruin your powder or cause injury . I worked with pinball machines and when pulling out the glass it had to be supported, if you didn’t the cantilever would stress tempered glass to much and you would get an explosion. I saw 3 pinballs ruined from careless service guys or arcade staff when cleaning the glass and moving a jammed ball.
They should make a desktop tumbler with built in filter and conduit to attach a vacuum for a less messy initial removal of unsintered material which collects and can easily be poured back into the machine for reuse then a media blaster that uses the same nylon powder to blast any remaining nylon powder off the print, then that powder can be reused as it has not been contaminated with blasting media. If the main concern with reusing "used" powder is the larger lumps ruining the surface quality and interfering with structural integrity, perhaps "used" powder could be milled back to a powder via a mechanical grinder?
So much respect for Stephan for admitting that even FDM printing can be hazardous for your health. So many creators in this space completely ignore the health risks associated with FDM printers and so many in the community are in denial because of this.
but prusament pla smells so good when printing.. :(
@@riverjane1223it smells so good that sometimes I eat a couple of supports
The health risks of FDM are relatively minor as long as you stick to the most common materials, like PLA. If you need to print any chemically nastier filaments like ABS, nylon, PC, PVDF, etc. then you really need to take safety precautions, like making sure your room is well ventilated and ideally the printer is filtered.
I just realized the Colorado PCB assembly booth next to micronics. That’s so kind since they helped William Osman (organizer of open sauce) finish his pcbs in time for the mrbeast squid game
It's literally a laser printer except the toner cartridge is open to the air and you have to dig through it. If you've ever messed with laser toner you'll understand. I can't imagine, haha. It's cool technology but the *main* reason I would want SLS is for printing metal. Maybe some day before I die.
Oh I think metal sls printing is their main goal and aspiration
@@LeafBoye have they ever said this?
This video aged like a fine glass of milk
We have been using and researching SLS at work for around 20 years, and to be honest, I don't see it as a viable hobby technology due to mess, material cost, complexity, cleaning post process, and energy requirements, but this looks great for a small business use. I wish them all the best
Yeah it seems SLS won’t be ready for hobby use anytime soon. For it to be ready for home use it would need to be a fully enclosed system. You give it your model to print and it spits out a finished and post processed part.
What do you think of their safety advice about using the printer?
The best review of this printer. Great questions and answers. Definitely not for the "maker dudes"!
This video was a great explanation of SLS, I learned a lot about the process and this cool printer. I think you asked great questions and I can't wait to see this method of printing become more accessible like FDM printing has.
Thank you for another fantastic video! This video gets into more of the important details than any other video on this printer.
I'd love to have one, but I think it's definitely not for everyone due to safety and mess issues as you mentioned. The same as any machine using powder based printing.
Hopefully it will be a hit, and over the next couple versions they will develop more safety related additions. But I think it will always be a bit risky and messy just because of all that powder. It's definitely not for the average person.
I really hope they have a organization method for parts that lays them as flat as possible, therefore allowing the bed to be as thin as possible and use less powder, opposed to a talk tower and more leftover powder….. I like it though!!!!
I used to work for one of the largest SLS 3D printing bureaus in the country i reside.
Having not enough virgin powder can also cause a pool of plastic to form during the print process. It's not pretty or easy to resolve. We used to use a 1:1 virgin to used ratio.
I've seen videos on TH-cam of diode laser cutters marking and cutting transparent materials just fine. What the owners do is they place a black piece of card stock underneath the material that is being cut or marked. This also means the card stock has a cool pattern etched into it that can be framed as a secondary art product.
This SLS looks really cool. I really hope it succeeds. You will definitely want to make sure you wear PPE when using it.
Much better angle to take than some other channels, great video
It looks like he never got his hands on the printer.. hes basically just doing an interview rather than a product demonstration.
@@shivaargula4735 It probably wouldn't survive international shipping in its current state.
@@shivaargula4735 i still find it more entertaining and informative than flaming a beta preprod unit for 30 minutes
Another blow to all the supporters of the product selling out to a Huge company and loosinbg any goodwill.
Great video. I am excited to see this technology coming down in price. I personally don't have a use for this type of machine but it is still really cool to see none the less and I hope it is successful.
It would be advised to upgrade the laser to 10-15W one to reduce the general temperatur of the unused powder .
It helps reusability and the cleaning of the parts.
Hope they address the hazard of the combustible dust. Tpu especially. Lofted in air it can kick off with static spark. Need proper grounding. And for more advanced materials inerting the chamber is necessary
Their high speed fan filter unit thing is super dangerous on the combustible dust front one mistake and you could have the cake in the exhaust airstream and loft the entire chamber worth of dust into the air where it very easily could find an ignition source. Normally the post processing is done with vaccum filtration systems where the exhaust is dispersed so that there is no risk of that happenning. None of their post processing equipment looks even remotely ESD/anti-static either so the powder is just going to go all over the place.
Everyone should watch this video and also the Stranger Parts video on this machine before backing the Kickstarter campaign.
Looking forward to your material tests in the future, especially the carbon fiber and glass infused ones.
project looks great, dudes seem knowledgeable but 8 Months from pre-production design to shipped product is extreeeemly optimistic. just the pilot production run, testing and improving for volume production alone will take them a good 3 months if they already have their supply chain completely figured out. wish them best of luck to pull it off though! I'd love to have an SLS printer but I don't trust myself to handle the powder in a way that would not harm my family and me.
Just maybe don't have kids playing in the same room with ANY printer?
Do you blame the maker of your resin printer if your kid drinks from post-process jug?
@@woldemunster9244 don't hallucinate about what I said! I'm merely stating that I will not mess with SOME technologies like nuclear fission, chemistry involving Arsenic or DIY submarines - even if I'd love to. Not saying it's not safe to so, if you know what you're doing and if you're meticulous about the process but I will pass.
Carbon fiber reinfocred powder? How it suppose to work? Regular filaments has relatively long fibers which reinforce the print. How long fibers in powder? Not really long I think.
Well it seems to work well enough but even they said themselves that there's room for improvement and I can imagine having other types of powders is something they're gonna have to do just like how 3d printers started out with worse filaments than now
Carbon fibre "reinforced" filaments are actually weaker and more brittle. This exact channel has plenty of videos showing this fact. The fibre lengths are no where near long enough for the plastic matrix to effectively tranfer stress to the fibres to bear.
The carbon fibre in these filaments has such a small length:diameter rario it's effectively just a particulate, and acts like an impurity, not a reinforcing fibre.
Yeah CF reinforcement from a fine powder is a joke
It just makes it even more toxic and weaker random chopped fibers don't improve strength they can make a part more rigid but you typically lose out on strength and toughness by gaining some in the surface wearing properties. Basically its only strong where the fiber rubs against something but the bulk is now swiss cheese with either glass or carbon dust in it.
I remember when FDM 3d printers were thousands of dollars. Now I can pick up an ender 3 for $200, or a better FDM printer for two or three times that. Maybe when I'm old I'll be able to buy an SLS printer cheap.
I'm hopeful too. We've seen crazier leaps in tech. I think it's possible
I saw the ender 3 on a sale for a third less too!
Could you in theory be able to grind down old or failed parts into powder that you can remix into the chamber to reuse?
these guys sounds like they have all the details in the design pretty well worked out
Even for regular plastic prints, SLS would be a game changer.
Supports are horrible right now. Having SLA quality, with FDM strengths, with supports easier than PVA to deal with, makes it amazing.
That booth guy really knows his stuff!
Yes, this is what Kickstarter was made for!
no one mentioned the 1 downside of SLS i can think of, which is you cannot print an air tight hollow item, as the powder would be sealed inside it.
Interesting thought but I think most people printing at this level already know of that limitation because that's not unique to just SLS, liquid resin printing already has the same issue (although it would be way more impactful on SLS depending on shape but it's the same issue still)
Same problem with sla too
@@chomp7927 Isn't the problem less severe for liquid resin printing because the material should flow out during the process?
@@LanceThumping If you don't use drain holes, I'd argue it's much worse for SLA because the trapped resin is likely to burst out from the trapped volume, splattering resin in places where it probably doesn't belong. As little as you might want either SLS powder or SLA resin on/in you, I suspect that enclosed volumes of powder are less dangerous than enclosed volumes of resin.
If you use drain holes with resin, you either have to put them in an unimportant location or weld plugs into the holes. I'd assume the same would be true for SLS, though plugging the drain holes would be more challenging.
@@LanceThumpingyou can do drain holes with SLS too
I'd like to know what the strength of the nylon parts are compared to FDM printed PLA. I assume that there would be a reasonable difference in strength.
How much of the cost of a commercial SLS print job is the machine time vs the powder or operator time? I don't really want an SLS in my basement but would like to be able to send out SLS jobs nearer the cost of an FDM print.
Fantastic video with great points and a grounded approach!
Really cool for a dedicated shop 👌 I kind of wish the build volume was smaller though so it could use less power and also lower the price, especially in early development
I don’t know if making it smaller would lower the price all that much, all the main components would need to remain the same, laser, auger, etc. If you made it smaller than likely all you could save would be in using a smaller heater and a smaller recoater (which is just a rubber blade). All the expensive parts would stay the same.
You're very good at asking the right questions, great video!
i share safety concerns especially with the "desktop" label which invoked the idea of it milling away in any old room. this is most certainly a shed/garage/etc type machine; a place you expect to get dusty and make relevant precautions.
If you have dust accumulation from this printer your about one step away from a dust explosion. The area around the printer has to be keep immaculate even if it always gets covered in a fine layer of dust after use you must always clean up afterwards. Failure to clean up after a spill or regular use is literally a road to disaster. I would not want this kind of dust mixing with metal/wood dusts either that probably has all sorts of unpredictable combintations of danger.
So as a Fuse1 owner, that powder cleaning setup is absolutely not going to be sufficient. ;-) Even with Formlabs' Sift cleaning station (with a giant filter and suction system) powder *still* sneaks out everywhere just at every step once it's out of the printer... Doing that kind of cleaning in an open container as shown will be a HUGE mess after a couple prints. (Especially since you need to brush the partially sintered powder somewhat aggressively-- it doesn't just fall away loose like with MultiJet Fusion or EOS powders.) I'm also a little skeptical of the claims for supporting PA+CF powder as I believe that would really require an inert atmosphere in the machine. I can see a lot of print problems in their sample parts (possibly just from powder that was reused too many times or with too low of refresh rate), but for an entire printer that costs about as much as just the build chamber for the Fuse1... Might be worth a shot!
I wish you asked how long it would take to print single objects and the entire build volume full of objects compared to a filament printer.
I really hope they have massive success with this, not because I backed it, but because I'm waiting for the gen 3 or even gen 4 machine, when the kinks have been worked out. I have serious doubts about the safety of this machine in the hands of "typical" end users. An N95 mask really isn't enough. This machine needs to be limited to enclosed spaces away from living spaces, because there IS going to be dust getting everywhere, and despite nylon being non-toxic, the fine particulate itself poses a physical risk to your lungs.
Hopefully with future iterations this can be better addressed.
I also hope that they have done their research on manufacturing. There is no doubt that in order to get the machines manufactured to sell at this price point, they will be using a Chinese factory, and manufacturing in China comes with a lot of caveats. Most factories over there will make undocumented changes to your parts if you don't stand over them micromanaging everything, and this can have pretty serious results. It really is necessary to have someone in the factory working directly for you, not the factory ensuring that quality is maintained and there are no changes being made to your specification.
I wonder about where to get the powder. I can get resin or filament from Amazon or my local Microcenter. Does their powder come from them? If they go out of business will I never get more powder?
Yes, you will. It's not specific to this printer, so you can get it from many sources (SLS printer retailers, Alibaba, ...) Just search for SLS PA12
You can buy the powder from many sources its the same stuff industrial printers use. Just be aware the powder is in fact toxic due to it being an intert but ultrafine powder. (Contrary to what the mfg says the SLS process is very dangerous if you don't follow all the best practices)
I think they are where Sinterit was 10 years ago. I would stick to proven brands and wait out on this for a a couple of years at least until all reliability issues have been worked out.
Thanks for the great video and input they seem to have done something incredible. And you still asked great questions.
However your critique regarding production: kickstarter was never meant to be able to buy a finished perfect product. So the idea that money/funding is given to support their idea should retain the highest priority, not having a perfectly refined mass produce product imo
Danke fürs zuhören :)
I don’t think anybody was going to drop $4k on this without understanding that SLS isn’t something to do in your bedroom anyway. I backed it myself
I think there are plenty of people who use resin printers improperly and spend far more than 4k without understanding the risks. SLS printers can cause long term toxic powder buildup it could literally spread itself around a building slowly giving people around lung cancer in the long run. The mfg could be much more clear that to fit the budget all safety items are the user's responsiblity and provide a clear list of required items for any standard procedure including spill handling.
try liquid solvent pla 3d printing, heating will evaporate and solidify the pla. adhesion to previous pla tho.
I own a Sintratec SLS kit for 5K USD/EUR. The biggest issue is closed software code or microcontroller hardware. it's really off-putting when you can fix or tweak the process, especially on something delivered as a kit.
The worst aspect of SLS is the non-uniform pre-heating of the powder. Any reflection of the IR halogen bulbs on the chamber walls does lead to spot being hotter than others. Some areas will melt and clog up the slider distributing the powder ruining your prints in progress. other areas will not get hot enough to properly melt and solidify. not bond properly.
Also, fine tuning of the unused material not caking up gets hard, ramping up excessive deterioration of the powder.
You would need to access the sensor reads and tweak them in code, both of the slicer and the microcontroller level. Which you cannot do if it's not fully open source. in the case of my Sintratec kit it isn't, so I would have to design a board and software from scratch.
I resorted to black super high heat resistant paint to cover the chamber walls and reduce reflections. However this interferes with the powder slider operations and the microswitches controlling the endstop positions, as these are not heat resitant enough. It's tricky to find and source better reliable heat resistant switches or come up with simple solutions.
In the end of it I use other techniques than SLS and still do most prints on a single extruder FDM Ender 6 machine.
I only needed a set of a dozen small hydrodynamic surfaces FDM could do from that machine.
Eventually using a second FDM machine with a dual extruder would be the better option.
The only advantage of any truly open source SLS machione would be the functional parts nylon PA12 can achieve.
In FDM this si the realm of carbon fibre enhanced filaments and Sinter metal FDM filaments used in conjunction with washable support materials.
The powder cost and especially the powder waste is exceptionally high.
Actually without very delicate tweaking all the powder in the chamber is lost once exposed to to the IR light heating process.
I would tend say more laser power in the 15 W range is better as you do not have to preheat uniformly very close to the melting point.
5 W isn't really does enough for getting the job done properly. Light reflections in the build chamber do cause way too much uneven heating of the thin top layer of powder.
Throwing multiple parts into the chamber isn't such a great idea either.
Many parts will warp and any of them might cause a failed print. it's near impossible, even from recorded video footage, to discern which print largely submerged did cause the slider to crash into such a warped part or dislocated part. So maximizing your build chamber utilization is really workable either unless you have super good heat mangement and can tweak it in open source accessible stuff.
On the other hand providers don't want to be liable for you tweaking high power laser gear. So very likely the stuff you need to get at is locked down.
Also working with lasers is highly dangerous. For me it's just a few burned rubber gloves so far, even when being super cautious.
You don't see laser light path.
Also the Sintratec machine needs mirror cleaning and significantly had to improve ventilation flow and filtering to make it work more reliably.
The Micronics filter system looks more serious but I would have to look at the specific machine before deciding to buy / not buy one.
As modifying filters would impact the exposure timing, heat management and heat tuning I would also insist on a fully open source accessible platform in both software slicer suite as well as in microcontroller access you are no likely to get here.
Managing poweder as a desktop printer is impossible. This is only suitable for dusty workshops.
I use a cyklone filter on a shopvac. Then build a powder sieve for recycling powder from a 100 micorn lab sieve, ikea boxes a few springs and an old swing grinder.
Only to be used outddors. I also build myself a sandblasting chamber and bought a compressor. The need for accessories is high and needs to be factiored into the price. I would skip on the their sieve and directly sandblast the cake recovered from the chamber.
Sieve the excess powder after. keep in mind it is questionable if you can reuse it after heating.
Again, you would only get a working powder economy if you have full access to the source code of the temperature management.
Also posititioning and access to the IT sensor signal is key.
Huge difference if that IR sensor scopes black melted or grey unmelted plastics in the previous layer.
Another thing you want access to understand what the machine is failing at.
Stuff likely not exposed by any closed shop software you may be ending up to being to tied to for good or bad.
I hope this gives you a much better SLS insider idea what you are betting 3k plus bucks onto.
How do you print an empty but enclosed sphere or cube, (anything) without trapping the raw powder inside?
This is very cool! I support this. I am for all expensive industrial machines to reach the cheap home level.
well well well… how the turntables
The fine detail quality depends more on x/y resolution not the spot size itself. The spot size only limits the size of the most thin walls and parts. So fine details should still be possible like on resin printers or like "fuzzy skin" on FDM-prints with 0.4mm nozzle can produce much smaller details - in theory.
It depends heavily on both spot size and X/Y resolution depending on what you are printing. When printing large parts spot size doesn’t matter much but when printing thin or detailed parts spot size matters a lot.
Just look at the difference between 0.2 mm nozzle FDM prints and resin prints, the FDM print will not look as good despite possibly having the same X/Y resolution.
A 0.25 mm spot size means that any outside sharp edge or corner will have a 0.25 mm fillet applied to it.
@@conorstewart2214 as I said - the spot size limits the size of parts, but not the fine details (of larger objects above 3x spotsize, as bigger as no matter)
I definitely don't think SLS can have as far a reach as FDM printing for the health reasons you mentioned, but having it be more financially accessible would definitely help it be utilized by those that might not have been able to otherwise
Iv mentioned this on another channel reviewing this machine, but i wonder if making the media a slurry would help in the handling department? It should make dust a non issue, and the right fluid shouldn't interfere with the fusing of the particles or be effected by the heat. You obviously dont want ot bouling off or creating pockets in the part. But im also thinking about thermoset plastics in general, something that comes in a liquid or gel form, a lot like photoresin, and sets permanently with heat. Invista has a thermoset nylon thats being developed, and i wonder if that would be suitable for an SLS type system?
A slurry would definitely interfere with the fusing the laser would first have to evaporate whatever is making it a liquid slurry which would create a vapor expansion which would throw the hot bit of plastic around making a total mess. If you had a heat curing resin you effectively would just have an upside down resin printer which do exist the other problem with a liquid/slurry is it wouldn't provide enough support to make the prints support less.
I want numbers for strength. Would love to see notched Izod and tensile tests with their prints.
This is really awesome definitely not in my budget but really awesome none the less
Why are they saying its the first desktop SLS 3d printer? Fuse 1 was released like several years ago
It's really ingenius in many ways, even if there are some hiccups. The slicer especially.
Just needs some more thought to post processing, such as recycling used nylon powder. Post processing SLS prints is a major hassle in my experience. At least without something like you get with the Formlabs Fuse 1 setup (downdraft table, vacuum, air blaster, etc).
But raw Co2 lasers are cheap like really cheap is it the mirrors or what does add that cost?
How is the energy consumption and heat retention? other sls printers seem to have thicker walls?
did he get to work out the auger jam issue and the spreader fault causing the constant failures we saw on the other dudes channel?
They should put modular chambers to manage the space more efficiently. if you have smaller parts to produce, you can use a smaller chamber to save your material.
Based on an extra chamber being over $1000, it would not be cheap to have multiple build chambers of different sizes. You are probably cheaper just trying to make sure that you use as much volume as possible.
@@conorstewart2214 I think your price estimation is not accurate. I said modular meaning it's a housing you can be placed and removed on the already build chamber. given the entire chamber is hitted up using light, no need for even hitting element for the smaller chamber. all it needs is to deposit the powder inside the smaller chamber rather than the entire bed.
Where did they find Nylon 12 for 80$/kg?
A quick google gives me 100$/kg (140$/kg in Canada)
Since the parts are full fill, it will use more material for a similar part. (also stuck material on the part)
You might lose material if over heated or overused.
Adding the post processing (you can't batch process the blasting part), the printed parts will be a lot more expensive.
(I read that a print takes a long time and you also have to wait for the powder to cool down for many hours...)
(can you use an ultrasonic cleaner to batch post process the parts?)
I need more info on durability of the printed parts and the machine itself.
(edits)
The morph transition on the cuts is really unsettling in a way I can't describe hhgh
Hella cool tech tho
Hey Stefan, I’ve had a Sinterit Lisa X for two years and finally returned it due to constant problems. Given the engineering/cost/experience of this machine vs Micronics’ I have serious concerns not mention here. Let me know and I can share that with you if you want.
interesting that it only uses a 5 W diode laser, i did some research in cheap desktop laser cutting a while ago for a friend of my father. 20 Watts is about the average for a cheap laser desktop cutter
I like the idea of SLS printer, but the clean up is main reservation I have. My designs would have multiple delicate pieces, that could be a pain to clean.
There is a place for all manufacturing technologies. SLS is very cool, but no additive process comes close to FDM/FFF in terms of ready to use parts right off the build plate.
Can open-source kick start an SLS revolution?
Honestly I'm skeptical that SLS can be made anywhere near as convenient, whereas FDM continues to improve rapidly. Even the isotropic properties can be just about achieved with the right choice of filament (less commonly used filaments like polypropylene fuse between layers much more strongly and so layer adhesion is much less of an issue, and better materials in the future will likely improve that for more conventional choices as well).
I had a thought. Figured this would be a good place to post as Stefan @cnckitchen does a lot of good testing.
Would the results of preforming tensile, and other strength tests on a single strand of unused filament have a linear correlation with printed parts of the same material? If there was any correlation, preliminary new filament tests could be done quickly. I realize there’s some tests that required rigid pieces. Just a thought:)
What's the name of the printed part shown at 1:37? Where can I find it? Anyone pleaseeeeeee...
You don't mention power: I would imagine all that heat requirement means a much higher power consumption versus FDM. It's amazing to have another technology for 3D printing, but this seems a niche method better suited for production than prototyping.
You should make a new video calling out both formlabs and micronics.
what's about printing speed?