Replicator Mark 2
Replicator Mark 2
by Gort
Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:25 pm
looks like a new Makerbot 3-d printer is coming out tomorrow!
The Replicator Mark 2?
The rumor is that it is closed sourced.
http://mike-ibioloid.blogspot.com/2012/ ... ark-2.html
The Replicator Mark 2?
The rumor is that it is closed sourced.
http://mike-ibioloid.blogspot.com/2012/ ... ark-2.html
by Gort
Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:47 am
The jury is still out on all of the changes but cool looking new printer
http://mike-ibioloid.blogspot.com/2012/ ... idoes.html
http://mike-ibioloid.blogspot.com/2012/ ... idoes.html
by PedroR
Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:18 pm
Hi Gort
Thank you for your post.
It's definitely interesting to see such mixed feelings.
I don't mean to start a debate here so I will refrain from sharing my opinion but it will be very interesting to see the progress of Makerbot over the next months.
The Replicator 2 is out and the Replicator 2X is now lined up for release in January (I bet it'll be at CES as historically that's where Makerbot has unveiled their latest innovations)
One of the very cool things about Replicator 2 that may not be obvious to many yet, is that it should make life soooo much easier for people looking to build _very_ large parts (compared to using ABS on an open/vented printer).
Regards
Pedro.
Thank you for your post.
It's definitely interesting to see such mixed feelings.
I don't mean to start a debate here so I will refrain from sharing my opinion but it will be very interesting to see the progress of Makerbot over the next months.
The Replicator 2 is out and the Replicator 2X is now lined up for release in January (I bet it'll be at CES as historically that's where Makerbot has unveiled their latest innovations)
One of the very cool things about Replicator 2 that may not be obvious to many yet, is that it should make life soooo much easier for people looking to build _very_ large parts (compared to using ABS on an open/vented printer).
Regards
Pedro.
by Gort
Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:54 pm
The big problem that I see with the R2 is that it only uses PLA. I am not a big fan of PLA. I use ABS because I find PLA to be more brittle and not as strong.
I will check out the R2-X but the price is starting to get a little too high for me. I am going to check out all of the new printers at the Worlds Maker Faire this week and see if any are better than the Replicator 1.
I will check out the R2-X but the price is starting to get a little too high for me. I am going to check out all of the new printers at the Worlds Maker Faire this week and see if any are better than the Replicator 1.
by Gort
Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:44 pm
I saw lots of cool printers this weekend!
It is going to take me a while to digest all that I saw and heard.
But here are my first impressions.
The Replicator 2 is a step backwards from the Replicator 1.
The Ultimaker maybe the new star of the open hardware and software community.
Most of the new printers looked like they where still in the Beta stage of development.
I am going to stick with my favorite three: Thing, UP! and Replicator 1 for now.
Prusa's I3 is the printer that I am must interested in for the future. It looked like it had huge upside.
It is going to take me a while to digest all that I saw and heard.
But here are my first impressions.
The Replicator 2 is a step backwards from the Replicator 1.
The Ultimaker maybe the new star of the open hardware and software community.
Most of the new printers looked like they where still in the Beta stage of development.
I am going to stick with my favorite three: Thing, UP! and Replicator 1 for now.
Prusa's I3 is the printer that I am must interested in for the future. It looked like it had huge upside.
by mantrid
Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:23 pm
Gort wrote:I saw lots of cool printers this weekend!
...
The Replicator 2 is a step backwards from the Replicator 1.
The Ultimaker maybe the new star of the open hardware and software community.
Prusa's I3 is the printer that I am must interested in for the future. It looked like it had huge upside.
Could you possibly expand on all 3 comments?
Especially why the replicator 2 is a "step backwards"
TIA
by Gort
Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:16 pm
The Replicator 2 is a step backwards from the Replicator 1.
You have to understand what the R2 is. It is an attempt by Makerbot to eliminate all R1 issues and make a printer for the masses. So what they could not fix they took out. ABS, heated build platform and dual extruders.
The Ultimaker maybe the new star of the open hardware and software community.
With MakerBot going closed. Ultimaker is now king of the hill of the open hardware and software printers on the market right now. It also has the largest community of makers behind it right now. This all may change between now and Bay Area Maker Faire 2013.
Prusa's I3 is the printer that I am must interested in for the future. It looked like it had huge upside.
Prusa has come up with a lot of cool designs in the past and his new printer looked like it had a lot of grow potential.
Advances are happening fast in the DIY 3d printing field and new companies are showing up all the time. Just look at all of the 3d printers on kickstarter. So everything I saw at the New York Maker Faire could change in the next few weeks or months.
Resin printers are a good example.
You have to understand what the R2 is. It is an attempt by Makerbot to eliminate all R1 issues and make a printer for the masses. So what they could not fix they took out. ABS, heated build platform and dual extruders.
The Ultimaker maybe the new star of the open hardware and software community.
With MakerBot going closed. Ultimaker is now king of the hill of the open hardware and software printers on the market right now. It also has the largest community of makers behind it right now. This all may change between now and Bay Area Maker Faire 2013.
Prusa's I3 is the printer that I am must interested in for the future. It looked like it had huge upside.
Prusa has come up with a lot of cool designs in the past and his new printer looked like it had a lot of grow potential.
Advances are happening fast in the DIY 3d printing field and new companies are showing up all the time. Just look at all of the 3d printers on kickstarter. So everything I saw at the New York Maker Faire could change in the next few weeks or months.
Resin printers are a good example.
by PedroR
Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:02 pm
Hi Gort
I know I'm bit late to this discussion but we've only been able to get our hands on the Rep 2 in our lab this week. (it has bene travelling around for endless demos).
I must say that all of us are very impressed with Rep 2.
I agree with you that at first Rep2 looks like Makerbot's attempt to resolve the issues by eliminating the feature but after using Rep 2 for a few days I have to say this totally not the case.
They usually say that in technology you get 90% of the functionality in 50% of the time.
What Rep2 is, to us, is the other 50% of the time spent perfecting the remaining 10% of the functinality.
before getting into lsiting how we feel about Rep2, it is important to say the following: we are not using Rep2 with Makerware; instead we're using ReplicatorG0039 and 0040 which we find can get a lot more out of this machine when compared to the current version of Makerware.
This is what we found with Rep 2:
- Layer Height and Resolution:
We've been printing with a default layer height of 270 microns on Rep2 and we're already getting great results out of the machine.
The greater the layer height, the higher the speed but the lower the quality.
In Rep2 you can bring this down to 100 microns (officially) and unofficially we know Makerbot has been experimenting with 50 microns.
- Huge improvements in mechanical resistance and resistance against layer detachment:
The parts printed with Rep2 and PLA are actually a lot more sturdier than their counterpart printed in Rep1 and ABS.
... with ABS there is a visible difference in mechanical resistance to pulling when you pull the part paralel to the Z axis (layer detachment) compared to pulling in X and Y directions
... Parts printed in Rep 2 and PLA are a LOT more resistant against layer peeling: so far we haven't been able to break any part despite whatever the direction in which we pull, on a part that had only 10% infill (and believe me we've abused it).
(it was this part http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:11637 )
- Accelerated Printing actually works on Replicator 2
Unlike Replicator 1 where acceleration often detaches parts from the platform, Rep 2 prints with acceleration by default and it works perfectly.
- Design changes to thermal performance on the extruder
The extruder is modified and the airflow seems to have been specifically engineered for best results. There's an additional side fan that directs air specifically towards the extruder and the nozzle.
- Changing filaments mid print
This was a popular option for the Thing o Matic and it seems to be back with the Replicator 2. We haven't tested it yet but it seems to be possible.
There is this impression that Replicator 2 is less than what Replicator 1 offered but we now feel this is wrong angle:
If you have the opportunity to use a Rep2 you will see it's a significantly more mature machine.
On paper it doesn't do as much as the Rep 1 but in use it does a lot more than Rep 1 because it actually works very, very well and very smoothly. It just works.
There is also the idea that "PLA is stronger than ABS but also more
brittle". (we told this to customers ourselves).
Now that we have the machine in our lab we've been abusing the printed parts and they're actually quite sturdy.
I woud like to leave a final note about Makerware and RepG 0039 and 0040:
Makerware is a great software on paper but it is clear Makerbot still ahs a long way to go to make it as mature as ReplicatorG.
If you a Rep 2 we sincerely encourage you to use RepG instead of Makerware. You get a lot more out of these machines with ReplicatorG.
0039 and 0040 are available from the RepG google code page only and support the Replicator 2.
If you have a Replicator 1, it is also worth upgrading to 0040.
We've been able to get prints out of Rep 1 with 150 microns layer height using the latest RepG
The other new thing in Rep 0040 is native support for the Sailfish firmware.
Sailfish is an alternative firmware for Replicator 1 (derived from the Jetty firmware for the Thing o Matic) and has been gaining great popularity.
If you are the hacker type, Sailfish seems to offer improved features over the stock firmware for Rep 1 and is now natively supported on RepG 0040 which is great news.
Regards
Pedro
I know I'm bit late to this discussion but we've only been able to get our hands on the Rep 2 in our lab this week. (it has bene travelling around for endless demos).
I must say that all of us are very impressed with Rep 2.
The Replicator 2 is a step backwards from the Replicator 1.
You have to understand what the R2 is. It is an attempt by Makerbot to eliminate all R1 issues and make a printer for the masses. So what they could not fix they took out. ABS, heated build platform and dual extruders.
I agree with you that at first Rep2 looks like Makerbot's attempt to resolve the issues by eliminating the feature but after using Rep 2 for a few days I have to say this totally not the case.
They usually say that in technology you get 90% of the functionality in 50% of the time.
What Rep2 is, to us, is the other 50% of the time spent perfecting the remaining 10% of the functinality.
before getting into lsiting how we feel about Rep2, it is important to say the following: we are not using Rep2 with Makerware; instead we're using ReplicatorG0039 and 0040 which we find can get a lot more out of this machine when compared to the current version of Makerware.
This is what we found with Rep 2:
- Layer Height and Resolution:
We've been printing with a default layer height of 270 microns on Rep2 and we're already getting great results out of the machine.
The greater the layer height, the higher the speed but the lower the quality.
In Rep2 you can bring this down to 100 microns (officially) and unofficially we know Makerbot has been experimenting with 50 microns.
- Huge improvements in mechanical resistance and resistance against layer detachment:
The parts printed with Rep2 and PLA are actually a lot more sturdier than their counterpart printed in Rep1 and ABS.
... with ABS there is a visible difference in mechanical resistance to pulling when you pull the part paralel to the Z axis (layer detachment) compared to pulling in X and Y directions
... Parts printed in Rep 2 and PLA are a LOT more resistant against layer peeling: so far we haven't been able to break any part despite whatever the direction in which we pull, on a part that had only 10% infill (and believe me we've abused it).
(it was this part http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:11637 )
- Accelerated Printing actually works on Replicator 2
Unlike Replicator 1 where acceleration often detaches parts from the platform, Rep 2 prints with acceleration by default and it works perfectly.
- Design changes to thermal performance on the extruder
The extruder is modified and the airflow seems to have been specifically engineered for best results. There's an additional side fan that directs air specifically towards the extruder and the nozzle.
- Changing filaments mid print
This was a popular option for the Thing o Matic and it seems to be back with the Replicator 2. We haven't tested it yet but it seems to be possible.
There is this impression that Replicator 2 is less than what Replicator 1 offered but we now feel this is wrong angle:
If you have the opportunity to use a Rep2 you will see it's a significantly more mature machine.
On paper it doesn't do as much as the Rep 1 but in use it does a lot more than Rep 1 because it actually works very, very well and very smoothly. It just works.
There is also the idea that "PLA is stronger than ABS but also more
brittle". (we told this to customers ourselves).
Now that we have the machine in our lab we've been abusing the printed parts and they're actually quite sturdy.
I woud like to leave a final note about Makerware and RepG 0039 and 0040:
Makerware is a great software on paper but it is clear Makerbot still ahs a long way to go to make it as mature as ReplicatorG.
If you a Rep 2 we sincerely encourage you to use RepG instead of Makerware. You get a lot more out of these machines with ReplicatorG.
0039 and 0040 are available from the RepG google code page only and support the Replicator 2.
If you have a Replicator 1, it is also worth upgrading to 0040.
We've been able to get prints out of Rep 1 with 150 microns layer height using the latest RepG
The other new thing in Rep 0040 is native support for the Sailfish firmware.
Sailfish is an alternative firmware for Replicator 1 (derived from the Jetty firmware for the Thing o Matic) and has been gaining great popularity.
If you are the hacker type, Sailfish seems to offer improved features over the stock firmware for Rep 1 and is now natively supported on RepG 0040 which is great news.
Regards
Pedro
by Gort
Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:27 am
I must admitted that i have not used a R2 yet but I will stand by my first impressions. It is one step forward but two steps back. I base a lot of this on the fact that 3d printing experts at my local hackerspace can get their R1 to do the samethings as the R2 and more.
It looks like a good entry level printer for the masses but it has too many limitations for me.
No heated build platform.
Can not print ABS.
The price is starting to get to high for what you get.
I do hope that they sell hundreds of thousands and take 3d printing main stream!!
It looks like a good entry level printer for the masses but it has too many limitations for me.
No heated build platform.
Can not print ABS.
The price is starting to get to high for what you get.
I do hope that they sell hundreds of thousands and take 3d printing main stream!!