Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"The Stratasys printed part was printed with ABS material, 100% infill with a standard layer height on normal detail settings. Not having direct access to the machine I was not able to extract any real nitty gritty details on the overall print set up. For the Lulzbot print that I created I used HIPS material with a 0.5mm nozzle, 0.1mm layer height, 25% infill, 4 top and bottom solid layers, 45 mm/s print speed with standard acceleration, 240C extrusion temperature, 110C bed temperature, and an extrusion width of 0.6mm."

This is an apple to oranges comparison. I work with a Lulzbot 5, a Lulzbot Mini, a Stratasys dimension elite, and two polyprinters on a daily basis and have been working with 3D printers for over 10 years as part of my job. Why was a material like HIPS ever used for comparison with ABS if both machines can print with ABS? Why was the extrusion width 0.6mm on a 0.5mm nozzle? Why is he comparing a 100% fill print with a 25% fill print? Why didn't he mention that the Lulzbot Taz 5 he was using has a $500 print head upgrade to let it print soluble support material as well? This whole article just reeks of either someone who is either very new and inexperienced to Hobby 3D printers or was intentionally trying to make the TAZ 5 look bad. I have done similar comparison studies myself and have come to drastically different conclusions. We sold the dimension elite a while ago.




I'm not familiar with the tech but having read the article I feel he was very positive about the TAZ 5 and so doubt he was going out of his way to make it look bad.


I had some of the same questions...my suspicion is basically two fold

1) the infill change may have been intended to make the print times comparable (he suggested both were about 18 hrs)

2) He may have been attempting to compare the default (or default-ish) settings of each machine


Hi, I wrote this article. To answer your suspicions.

1) Realistically they are within an hour of each other regardless of infill so the total print time was negligible in this experiment. A few changes on both machines could make either or print much faster. 2) Yes, it was my intention to have the same layer heights and overall print settings as close to each other as I could.


Thanks for the information




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: