This topic contains 63 replies, has 12 voices, and was last updated by 
Omega64 2 years, 10 months ago.
-
Posts
-
@siymon thank you for mentioning me, I take this as an invitation to make myself heard. Up until now I have had three Prints with the Robox, one being the “Robox-Robot” at normal quality (49mins), a filament catcher for the purge area, on fine, wich warped quite a bit, but had a nice finish and one being three clips for tools, I found on the verse, again normal.
The last print completely fecked up the Robox, resulting in a weird piece of Daliesque and a pretty dirty head. Let´s say, I am used to cleaning up my tools from plotting and cutting, so It´s not a biggy for me.
Right now I am printing the calibration pattern, as I had to reset the printer and recalibrate everything. There I stumbled again over sticking issues with the bed. Tomorrow I will acquire sandpaper 1200 and sand it properly and have a go at it again.
Regarding the issue itself, I have had experience with quite some marketing in my time, as I am working in event marketing and tradeshows. When reading the 20microns claim I said to myself 2 things: a) It is an oversell, to break free from the competition, which consistently claimed for 100microns to 50microns max (save the Ultimaker) b) it is an undersell, for a sneaky sideattack, providing 20microns, although the technology is able to provide 10microns.
Of course I hoped for the latter.Against my nature I ordered first, and read up on the forums later, as the deal seemed out of this world and according to the forums it has been out of this world. When I came to this forums and read the Reviews on 3Dindustry, Cnet and all the usual suspects I became really unresty. Honestly the curbstomped the printer as being loud and slow and inaccurate. This is the main reason I became nervous.
Therefore I took part in all threads I deemed relevant, this one being the one that would most easily mirror the attitude of the devs. As I said before I am a burned child when it comes to Kickstarter, losing a couple grand already on vaporware and bad management. Of both expectations and communities. The few projects that went exceptionally well, would not offset the anger.
This is also the reason I opted out of backing the robox, but it was on my “look again later list”.Honestly I forgot about it, totally until I had the Conrad mail in my box and remembered, so painting with past glory I immediately orderd and Conrad/Paypal screwed up, making me wait for one workweek, giving me enough time to feed my worries.
I am a man of reason, and I know that the technology is still under development. The Needle valves are revolutionary and might be the next best to SLA-printing, which is, for my taste, still too experimental.
You asked one question: Is the Robox easy to use?
I answer: Not quite. It has a great interface giving you a headstart, when trying to get it running. But it has a less than optimal handbook and the calibration wording is cryptic to abysmal. I am not alone in this opinion.
The print quality is inconsistent and less than reliable at the moment, but this is a two out of three prints, with one using up 7 Meters of filament to give me a nice and pretty impression of, how a Robox-Bot would look like, if you rip out it´s entrails alive. Only it was a simple clip for the reel, to hold the filament when “repacking”. I highly doubt three clips should use up more filament than a robot five times it´s size in all dimensions.Well, now troubleshooting is a bitch, and without access to the core of the matter (read community development) there seem to be only three people in this world who totally understand the printer. One of them drops out, and we are in deep trouble. That´s the main downside of closed development.
On the other hand, opening up the code would make the competition (read BRIC-Factory-Owners) able to copy the technology and throw their own product on the market.I understand, that the dual-head development is a bigger step towards the top than 20micron printing, as the competition is already onto that and good at it. It increases usability of the product and extends the range of working filaments. After reading into the topic for a week now, I understand that versatility beats accuracy in 3D printing. But precision dictates the failure rate.
Now knowing the Robox is able to print in 20microns at times is accurate. It is hard to estimate how often it will fail to do so, which is not in line with versatility, because if you only have limited resources (time and filament in this case) you don´t want to gamble, whether your prints eff up.
I understand this, and I take it that while the claim of 20micron printing is accurate under a given set of circumstances, with a lot of known variables. But it is not precise, because the uncertainty is high, and you cannot simply drag a thing from the verse and print it consistently.
This being said, I have three questions:
a) Is the target of development still a consistent production of 20micron prints?
b) How do you aim to involve your community in development, which is a given in many other communities?
c) How do you see yourself catering to your existing userbase in the sense of upgrading the functionality and eliminating design flaws, while retaining the trust of the high risk investors (read kickstarters)These questions derrive from three assumptions:
1) If 20 microns are no longe the target of development, they should leave the marketing in favor of more realistic claims in line with the aims.
2) Swarm intelligence is a thing in 3D printing, this is my firm believe, since I first read up on the topic. 3DP seems to be the epitome of succesful Open-Source.
3) As the market grows, the incentive to stay with a manufacturer shrinks. Only outstanding support, outstanding functionality or outstanding versatility keep you from multiplying your options (SLA (800€) + Tiko (180€) + a random 3D scanner (300€)) Now having two or more functions of the competition or being exceptional at one (20microns) raises the incentive. Add some ease of access and you arrive with Apple products.Now what and who will CEL be? Apple-squedeveloping a closed development platform with amazing features and ease of use or Android-esque, developing an open platform with high versatility and customization?
Thank you for the long read, and for taking part in the discussion.
@pelgrim All right. Actually I am a much more friendly and forgiving than it may seem. If I heard, in the past months, from CEL a statement like “we’re sorry, we genuinely thought the Robox could be really considered a 20 um printer, but we only then realized that it should be considered a 100, or a 50, or whatever um printer because of problems we couldn’t foresee at the time” I’d have understood and not have protested in any way. They would have my moral support. However, by continously denying the evidence, by censoring a past post and now by even threatening me they haven’t gained my respect. I don’t want to bother anyone, I am a customer that bought this printer and not another because of a very much advertised feature which made the difference, I don’t like to be treated like a fool nor to hear anyone talking to me via threats, I have the uttermost respect for who respects me and I have total comprehension for the difficulties that an engineer may have in developing a product, because I am one too, as long as he’s honest with me. That’s all.
Let’s be friends, if possible. The Robox cannot do 20 um? It’s all right, but at least admit it, don’t treat me like an idiot. It will be able to do it someday? Well, give an estimated date, I’ve been asking for this for one year already, since day-one of purchase. But treat the matter seriously, without silly threats, without ignoring it and without letting it spin forever. It can’t do 20 um? Patience, life will go on.
I will try my best to not write anymore about this topic, but of course I’m still watching it and I don’t consider it dropped. I have much respect for myself, just like I want to have the uttermost respect for anyone who acts respectably.
I am not pretending the moon.
Have a nice evening.
Simon, you must admit that we at least try to correct all wrong perception (or at least our perception of a wrong perception) about Robox. How many times people complained about AM where the issue was really in Slic3r or Cura and how many times at least someone here pointed to the mistake? How many times bhudson stepped in as demanded some bold, claims about Robox’s unsuitability or similar? It is not that everyone is only bashing it.
Similar goes with almost anything in community: if someone posts not entirely true things or less reasonable demands - many immediately react to it. You might not have been here when I asked for some features just to be gunned down by other Robox users saying that it is premature and that CEL (and that was one of rare ‘information leak’ from the company) are concentrating on more important things (making Robox and AM more stable platform immediately after release).
If what people posted in this particular thread are untrue, irrelevant or otherwise incorrect - you would have seen many users of the forum already reacting (with perfect 20µm prints, explanation why it is not needed, comparison with other printers’ 50µm and 20µm prints, etc). Maybe lack of reaction is approval? Maybe CEL should learn something form this. It is not that people here don’t want it or take personal satisfaction of it allegedly not being achievable (20µm print) - they are just frustrated by lack of reaction from CEL (and I never fail to complain about it myself).
Just fact that you are only one appointed here (sorry Pete as well) to talk to ‘rest of the world’ points out that something is not quite right. Aren’t you (as a company) passionate about Robox as we are here? Why not talk to us? I already said you (personally) being here is huge improvement form what was before - and them you can try to put it in perspective how bad it was (first three months me owning Robox there was a post or two from people from CEL here on the forum and one of the postee left company very soon after posting, LOL).
With all this said - I am with Omega or Victor about forgiveness when you are close with someone. Had CEL been communicating with us we would have far more compassion and better insight what is going on. But so far it seemed that only some kind of aloofness and disregard is what comes across. I am sure that’s not really the case but current distance from ‘the community’ seem not to help.
It seems that the ball is in your court right now. You can easily go and moderate forum, removing things (I already cannot find thread from the end of last year), ban people and you’ll see similar posts in outside places as it was here which led me immediately dismissing it as my second printer). If enough people are there - even unofficial forums might spring up and people start congregating around them. But - would that sort bad press? Probably would even more fuel it. On the other hand - talking to us here, even raising hands in the air and admitting problems you’re encountering every day could help much more. I remember another community (not 3d printing) where they defended company quite furiously just because the admitted issues…
Ah - this post again got out of control. Sorry for the length.
Am I just too laid back? It seems to me that there is a mounting criticism on the forum here which is gathering pace. There’s a core group of people who post comments and there must be a much greater number of Robox users who clearly say nothing. Personally I look to the forum to give me information and operational procedures in order to get the best out of my Robox. I chose the Robox because I liked the look of it, what it said it could achieve and because it’s made in the same country that I live in - so I thought there was a practical aspect about this. But I’m always prepared for teething problems that may or may not be the machine - it could be the user. Last year my printing got into such a mess more often than not that it did seem there was a problem I didn’t understand. But since I replaced the printer head - only because it just got so covered in extraneous filament - and changed to PLA, things have improved. With the latest AutoMaker update, things are improving further. I’m sorry for the people whose print problems and unrealised expectations are a serious issue, but let’s keep things rational.
@paulsroom Thanks for that word of calm. I agree with you wholeheartedly.
To those who can’t produce reliable prints; why not? What are the issues you are running into? I have three printers and barring bad heads, I produce reliable prints almost every time. My success rate is in the 90 to 95 percent range when you look at all the prints I do. One print I am working on right now is a tiny dart for a customer - the walls are 0.4 mm thick and the whole thing is about 45 mm tall with a tiny little nosecone that inserts into the dart. It prints, and they all look almost the same. I had to learn that I can only print one at a time, which is different than other small parts, and I have to use Slic3r since Cura doesn’t slice the thin walls. But at least I have that option. I can print these parts, reliably, every time. I had to learn how, but once I did, I get good results.
Most of the issues I see with people complaining on this forum are the result of:
1. Mechanical problems. If your printer isn’t working properly and you suspect a mechanical issue, open a ticket with CEL support. You will get the right answer and they will solve your issue.
2. Wrong expectations. Some things can’t be printed. Some are designed for a different style of printer. I have printed parts from Thingiverse, from customers who have no idea how to design for 3D printing, and parts that I have designed myself after over a year of printing experience. When the print is within the capability of the Robox, it will get printed. If you have not sanded your bed and you are using PLA, you are asking for trouble. Use 400-600 grit and sand it until it isn’t shiny anymore. I have seen people complain about the pattern on the top of the parts. My response is always the same - that is a limit of the process. When you print something, it has to fall within the allowance of the process that manufactures the part. Some things don’t, that has nothing to do with the printer.
3. Lack of patience. 3D printing is still in its infancy. I didn’t have perfect prints off the bat. It took several weeks to learn how the machine worked and what its limits are. Many of those limits have changed over the last year and the machines work better now than when I bought them. Even my original beta unit, received in June, works great. I had to learn what could and couldn’t be printed. I am now running the highest-rated 3D hub in Phoenix, Arizona.
4. Fear. Don’t be afraid to explore and share. The community that you are all wishing was here is, but we need to support each other. I share profiles whenever anyone asks for them. When I develop a fix, I share it as soon as I know it won’t break your machine. What I don’t do is expect CEL to respond to an idea that I have and present here on the forum. Why? Because this is not the place for that type of feedback. Please do share what works and what doesn’t. Don’t complain that CEL isn’t listening to you because the specific thing you ask for isn’t added to the next version of AM. If there is an actual issue that needs to be addressed, open a ticket. Last I checked, there is a ticket option for improvement ideas too. Several of my ideas have seen direct incorporation into AM. CEL does listen.
As far as 20 micron prints - I had a customer ask me to develop a 50 micron profile. I had to ask CEL, but with their help it turned out really well for his prints. On delivery, he couldn’t tell the difference in surface quality between the 50 and 100 micron versions. The 2.5X increase in time was not worth the miniscule difference in Z axis layer quality. Those of you who want to print tiny, detailed things bought the wrong printer. You need an SLA printer, not an FFF (FDM) printer. It is really, really hard to get features less than 0.4 mm to print on ANY FFF printer. It is a function of the nozzle size and Robox has one of the smallest nozzles on the market. When you get smaller than 0.35 mm, you run into more clogging, more extrusion issues, and more time in printing. 20 microns is a holy grail of printing with an FFF machine. But anyone who spends any time printing less than 100 microns, in my experience, finds that it isn’t worth it. Sure, the Robox will print at 20 microns. I expected it when I bought the machine. My experience shows that it isn’t worth the time and I translate that ability to make 20 micron prints into better control of the Z axis leading to better quality prints overall.
I wish I could share some of the prints I have made with everyone, but they aren’t mine to share most of the time. I had a customer order a print and then bring in a competitor’s print to show me the comparison. At 100 microns, the Robox result was head and shoulders over the other print. The other print was an ultimaker, I believe. There were first layer adhesion issues, resonance causing surface features to replicate over the smooth parts of the top surface, differences in layer height, and the whole thing had warped. The customer told me that others he had shown the Robox part to didn’t believe it was 3D printed at first.
The other point I would like to make is that just because CEL doesn’t tell you they are working on something doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. You all complained about the lack of materials. A month ago, three new materials were introduced with the promise of more to come. The dual material head is on its way. Flexible material printing, something that no other bowden style machine can do reliably, is coming. I have done it, it won’t be much longer before everyone who chooses will be able to do it.
Find me another printer with the same specifications that the Robox has, with the same support, the same long warranty, and at the same price. Seriously. Because if you keep up the negative feedback, how long will CEL be around? If they can’t sell printers because your negativity is all anyone sees, they can’t stay in business. If CEL goes under, I will have to replace all my printers. CEL had an idea to do a 3D printer in a way that is accessible to anyone. It is safe, easy to use, relative to many others, has a huge number of advanced features that you can have just for the asking, and above all is the most reliable printer I have seen. Now, in return for all of that pioneering and forward thinking, you decide to provide negative feedback because your expectations turn out not to be realistic.
If you make a 20 micron print profile that works reliably, please share it. I am sure CEL will be happy to see it also. Personally, I would rather have a dual material head, flexible filament capability, more materials, better slicers, and better default profiles. I want reliability and dependability out of my printers. I could not care less about 20 micron prints. What I read online and what I read here says that they aren’t worth the trouble.
I will spend my tinkering time pushing more speed out of my printers with the same quality results and I may even try to get a dual material profile going. What are you going to use your time for? Find something productive to do with your time, don’t bash a company that is doing everything they can to deliver on their promises and still stay in business.
I operate two Betas and four Production Robox.
I am the US/Canada Technical Support engineer for the Robox.
www.hudsondesignlabs.comI really wished to keep my mouth closed, but with all due good manners I have to say the obvious again:
@bhudson As you are an employee of CEL, I think you should specify it in your signature or avatar, for a matter of transparency.
As you too admitted that the Robox at 50 um doesn’t improve final (top non-flat surface) quality over 100 um, so go figure at 20 um, why is it still advertised as a 20 um printer?
This gives it a sensible advantage over other 3D printers, but those extra sales it unfairly gets can only gain it new, angry, customers. Think about it. Do CEL needs more and more people to come in and ask “Hey! where’s my 20 um feature?”. Is it worth the extra sales?
I for one make precision mechanical pieces which sometimes have slightly curved top surfaces and would have taken very tangible advantage by purchasing a real 20 or 50 um printer, if I wasn’t deceived by the Robox marketing/advertisement on this issue, still standing other qualities of Robox that I don’t argue about and that I really appreciate and have duly stressed in many places. But this topic is about the 20 um claimed 3D printer, not about max bed temperature, heater speed, max nozzle temperature, PEI or other great features of the Robox.
I find it offensive that you pretend to teach me that for what I do I should have bought a SLS printer instead, as it was not me that sworn in all advertising that the Robox is a 20 um printer. I didn’t force CEL to claim the Robox a 20 um printer, it’s their choice and their responsibility, problem if you want, now.
I don’t expect let away pretend the Robox to print at 50 um or 20 um anymore, as I don’t expect nor pretend the impossible. But fairness (and a couple of laws too) imposes CEL to stop advertising it as a 20 um printer. Now and forever, unless CEL can really (nor by nodeadlinepromises, but really) make it to print at useful, PROPER, top non-flat surface qualities at those Z-layer resolutions, i.e. to really, effectively produce prints with that Z resolution. You don’t need it? It’s irrelevant and deceiving, because I do. And anyway if advertised at such, it must be capable too. It’s not? Stop advertising it as such.
By admitting it’s not, that it’s “just” a 100 um printer full of (other) great and even unique qualities, you can be sure a lot of criticisms will disappear, in this forum and outside.
Believe it or not, I like many others here that are now hated and threatened by CEL management, joined this community with enthusiasm and have comprehension and sympathy for CEL’s difficulties in this field like in others, just don’t fool new, potential customers, that’s all. Admit your mistakes, you’ll stand much better in the end. Don’t pretend your customers are idiots and don’t wage war to them.
As others have pointed out, if CEL was fair in this and other regards, this forum would be full of people (also non-employees) ready to defend the company at any occasion.
I’d be one of them, but I just don’t like to be treated like a fool, that’s all.
CEL: admit it’s a 100 um printer and close this issue. Or make it really work as a proper 20 um printer. We are not blind, nor stupid. Be honest to your customers when you ask your customers to be honest to the Robox. We will certainly be, if you are.
Stop targeting the effects, act on the causes.
@pelgrim based on what can you affirm that Ben Hudson is not a CEL employee?
From many sources, including Ben Hudson himself who admitted it on this forum, he is the USA rep. of CEL.
@bhudson is free to deny this if he thinks he or others were in error affirming his new (not so new) links with CEL.
If he works for CEL, at any title, for a matter of transparency it would be fair to write it in the signature or avatar.
If we have to discuss we should all act responsibly and fairly, unless a ban for my account is ready to go. But what goes around comes around, always.
—
Regarding the other things that you wrote, you are telling me more or less that it’s my fault if I want to print at 20 um on a 20 um printer, and that it’s pointless to want to do it, as you are happy with 100 um. You also show to totally misunderstand the difference between being able to step at 20 um and actually extrude at this resolution.
Put it another way: take 3 printers, e.g. from the ones that CEL used to compare features with the Robox [ “3D printers comparison” at CEL site: http://www.cel-robox.com/technical/#comparison ].
Take for example the 3D Systems Cube 3 (claimed as a 70um printer), the Ultimaker 2 (claimed by CEL as a 20um printer) and of course the Robox itself (claimed by CEL as a 20 um printer). Notice also that they claim it “Best Layer Resolution”, not “best Z resolution” (which can go much lower than 20um even on the most primitive and cheap 3D printer out there).
Now print something at 100um and let’s pretend the 3 printers come out with the same quality. Now print something at 70um, I bet that the quality will diminish more on the Robox than on the Cube 3 or on the UltiMaker 2. Now force all printers to 50 um resolution. I bet the difference between the 3 printers, that at 100um were comparable in quality, will be now even more noticeable. Forcing/tweaking (something that is theoretically possible on any printer) a print at 20um will se a disaster on the Cube 3 and Robox, and a better resolution than @ 100um on the Ultimaker 2 (of course with some additional problems to solve). Hence, the Robox and the Cube 3 are not a 20 um printers and the latter is not claimed as such for a good reason.@pelgrim in reply to your << What is the end-goal of your discussion ? >>
The goal is either make it work like a proper 20um as advertised, or stop falsely advertising it as such.
Do you think I am being unfair?
I love forums. I particularly like unmoderated free speech within forums (while civil), which is what I have tried to maintain in this forum. Yes I have removed / edited some posts in the past but this is mainly to prevent new users from being misled by incorrect information.
So, some facts and I hope the end of this thread. (I wont close it yet but if you feel the need to post 100+words please trim it back as I have much more valuable uses for my time.)
a) Bhudson is not an employee of CEL. Ben is a very capable engineer and we have asked him on several occasions to service Robox units which are near him geographically. I guess you could see him as a contractor. His opinions are his own -and sometimes not in line with my own- but they are valued, as are all of the other users of Robox. Ben has given a lot of his time freely to users on this forum and is truly a champion of Robox, I hope more of you can step up and help as Ben does. Less criticism, more constructive input, like a new print profile perhaps?
b) 20 micron prints on Robox. You can do it now, some models will fail, some will have perfect sections with flaws elsewhere. Maybe you will get a perfect result fist time.
The problem here…we want a repeatable, reliable result. Until we have this we wont release a profile but we WILL help you to work on one. Do a print, take a picture, share your changes. Talk about it, help each other. The ridiculous time it takes to do a 20 micron print means we need your help, we can’t test everything.
Fact - Robox has the highest Z resolution of ANY commercial printer.
Fact - Robox has the highest Extruder resolution of ANY commercial printer.
Theoretically these 2 things make 20 microns and lower much more likely to succeed.
No need to reply…lets move on.
For official support please visit www.cel-robox.com/support/ and create a ticketIt is simply not in my nature to forfeit, so apologies for continueing the discussion.
@pete you are saying, that by all means the Robox is a 20micron printer, and it´s just a matter of tweaking for the individual print you are planning to do. You are also saying, that the main blocker is insane printing times. Do I get this right?
What about an incentive programm for users -lending- their printing time? It´s just an Idea:
Provide the “Testmodel of the Week” to all users, with a suggestion of parameters and recommended filament. Let them print, or fiddle to their liking, and at the end of the week, they show their results (may it be balls of filament or almost proper prints). After taking part in, let´s say 4 Testing-Scenarios they receive, let´s be generous, a roll of filament.
This would free your testing time and provide an incentive to the community to sacrifice time and filament in order to further “the cause”.A simpel solution to a complicated problem. Once certain best practices show themselves you can go on and reward outstanding efforts of single participants and maybe even gift the one who solves the problem for good a, b or c. With a, b and c standing for something worthwhile and a token of true appreciation.
As I said I work in marketing, so my ideas are marketing driven.
@omega64 I am not the US representative of CEL, as Pete pointed out. I am a trained service technician and I contract repair for a certain subset of Robox units located in North America. I am not a reseller nor am I the only party who repairs Robox units in the US or in North America. I have been doing this since June 2015. I do not remember ever stating this fact before today in this forum. I think that you have been misled by another forum user who, even after being corrected multiple times, continued to operate under the idea that I was the US representative. CEL has no responsibility for what I say on these forums and if anyone is going to be censored, it will be me, and it has happened in the past when I have made errors in what I have told users. I welcome that type of correction as it means people looking over the forums will get the right information.
I operate two Betas and four Production Robox.
I am the US/Canada Technical Support engineer for the Robox.
www.hudsondesignlabs.com
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
