This topic contains 10 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by 
Rob 1 year, 3 months ago.
-
Posts
-
No, it’s not even developed at the moment afaik.
Also, see the shop. Delivery is set to 2nd quarter 2015.
Thought this was interest:
The Robox already has a similar sort of design which will work with to materials.
That is interesting… especially the Patent Pending bit. I wonder if the rotating nozzle one of the things CEL is trying to patent.
Tom Gidden -- Bristol, UK
Its interesting to see that they are pivoting the head to stop any ooze from the idle head sticking to the model. Interesting of course because the Robox uses its needles to stop the flow on the idle head, and also pivots it away from the model to avoid clashes.
My company took delivery of one of the new CubePRO’s duo’s a couple of weeks ago. There’s good and bad things with it. Perhaps interestingly for this thread is that it has a double head/nozzle (no needle valves obviously) but doesn’t string, doesn’t pivot the nozzles and doesn’t eject material from the idle head when printing . . its practically impossible to see the layers with its fine print setting (0.07mm layer height). . . . but then again each nozzle operates independently with separate extruders and reels and cannot combine fine and course extrusions in one print. Whilst I’m all for simple features to improve quality/functionality, 3DSystems have obviously overcome some of these issues without any whizzy hardware - but I guess they do have over 20yrs experience in 3DPrinting!
@rob, Do not forget the CubePRO is almost 3 times more expensive. But it’s good to see that they have their printer under control.
@medusadelft, yes it is considerably more expensive (3x price for filament too), perhaps unlikely to make too many waves in the ‘home’ printing market. To be fair the quality of print from the Robox is very similar. I expect the Robox will be more useful for smaller prints too when the dual material head is released. Just found out from 3DSystems that you cant print with PLA and ABS AND have a heated build chamber, due to the heat knackering the PLA reels (they’re mounted in the chamber). This wont be a problems for the Robox with the reels mounted externally.
I also get the feeling that the high price is due to the sheer weight of materials in it, a pretty shell but a beefy frame to keep it all stiff . . . the main reason for which (I guess) is the fact that the extruders are mounted on the moving head, that’s a lot of inertia to control and probably some oversized steppers to provide the power.
That sounds bizarre… the ambient temperature of the build chamber really gets that high?
Tom Gidden -- Bristol, UK
nope it only gets to 46 degrees, same as the Robox. doesn’t make much sense and bloomin ridiculous!!
That’s just silly. Storing the reels at that temperature (relative to the outside temperature) should actually benefit them… it’d drive out humidity a little quicker.
Tom Gidden -- Bristol, UK
Yes, seems logical. Their reels are fully enclosed though so I wonder if its something to do with that, either way I presume its something they’ve identified in testing and corrected last minute. Their $1300 price tag for an ultrasonic bath seems way way out of order if you can’t produce models with good layer adhesion/lamination in the first place . . . . I think someone’s made an almighty balls up with that!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
