| General > General Technical Chat |
| Cost - 3D printed enclosure vs Project box? |
| << < (8/12) > >> |
| PlainName:
--- Quote ---why not make something more functional and nice to use --- End quote --- I don't have any argument with that. My beef was the implication that one couldn't do that with 3D printing. It is possible, and it is just 'finishing' the product as you would via any other manufacturing process. --- Quote ---by designing and constructing it well? --- End quote --- Well, this is the issue, isn't it? There are a couple of simple answers: 1. You (not you personally, of course, but the 'royal' you) can't be arsed. Maybe you've milled and drilled an ally box and just can't be arsed to anodise it. Same thing. 2. You don't have the skillset. I think this is probably the more common reason - you might if you could, but not everyone knows how or has the vision. It is like drawing in that some people can bash off stunning portraits where others can barely manage a smiley emoji. You need to be somewhat of a creative to imagine how your project box might look nice, and then have the skills to make it like that. |
| ChrisLX200:
To me it's a matter of convenience, and whilst I prefer machined parts I'm more than willing to use a 3D printed part if it solves a tricky problem. Take the stepper motor bracket (below) which attaches a motor to a large focuser. To reproduce that using machined parts would have been quite a chore - and that's if I had managed to get the dimensions right first time (which I didn't quite). Using SketchUp I could calculate radii and intersection points then print the thing out, then make corrections if it wasn't quite right. The control box (green) was modded to include a step-down voltage converter (yellow version) simply by adding an extra compartment. The finish is 'acceptable' without further work - at least, I didn't feel inclined to reproduce the parts in metal. |
| innkeeper:
what about diy box vs 3d printed |
| CatalinaWOW:
If the objective is a mirror smooth finish, 3D printing is at a disadvantage. Many other technologies come with a smooth finish for free, or nearly free. While you can post process or use other techniques to improve the smoothness of the finish another approach is possible, and far easier with 3D than with other technologies. Give the finish a deliberate texture. Appropriate choices of texture can mask the roughness from the 3D process and enhance the beauty and functionality of the box. Things like better grip, non slip stackability with minimal volume penalty, and so on. Our preferences in boxes and our definitions of quality have been shaped by the fabrication technologies we use. They are not immutable. Think of the hammered metal paint finishes that were popular toward the middle of the last century (partly because they hid manufacturing defects). |
| Mr. Scram:
--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on November 01, 2017, 03:15:06 pm ---If the objective is a mirror smooth finish, 3D printing is at a disadvantage. Many other technologies come with a smooth finish for free, or nearly free. While you can post process or use other techniques to improve the smoothness of the finish another approach is possible, and far easier with 3D than with other technologies. Give the finish a deliberate texture. Appropriate choices of texture can mask the roughness from the 3D process and enhance the beauty and functionality of the box. Things like better grip, non slip stackability with minimal volume penalty, and so on. Our preferences in boxes and our definitions of quality have been shaped by the fabrication technologies we use. They are not immutable. Think of the hammered metal paint finishes that were popular toward the middle of the last century (partly because they hid manufacturing defects). --- End quote --- You have to work with the qualities and shortcomings of the material, indeed, rather than ignoring or even denying them. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |