- User Since
- Jul 27 2017, 12:05 PM (107 w, 4 d)
Fri, Jul 26
@adam Educators definitely have wanted to purchase backups, which is why we added it to the Workhorse Standard bundle. I could also see Mini 2 owners wanting the ability to print reinforced filaments without sacrificing detail that they would with the HS or HS+.
Thu, Jul 25
@adam @eBeardslee If we can give this priority to setup pricing and a part number, that is the most crucial part for sales to be able to quote this, which is necessary as it's part of our Workhorse Standard Education bundle. Since we're heading into the education buying season, I'd really like to get this done above all else.
@eBeardslee Something to consider that that we presently have the SL and HE tool head set to be interchangeable on the Standard Workhorse Bundle option. Is it possible that we can price the HE tool head the same as the SL tool head? This would prevent us from having to redo the standard bundle.
Tue, Jul 23
Never doubt that a customer will want to do it just cos
Jul 1 2019
@karrad We have cosmetic QC standards that we adhere to such as: no squish, good layer adhesion (not measured with any specific tools, just by appearance), minimal overhang droop (also not a specific measurement more regarding appearance), no color inconsistency, no warping, good initial layers and a good surface finish.
@cmerot At the moment we have one TAZ 6, one TAZ Pro, and four Mini 2 printers designated for CM. I've also been occasionally using one of the TAZ Pros over at Mountain for longer multi-day prints as we cannot have prints running overnight here at Lago. I'd really like to iron out all the intended processes, especially with regards to QA/QC, which I think we can leverage a lot of knowledge/experience from Cluster for.
May 28 2019
May 2 2019
What about HE for Hardened Extruder? Might give the wrong idea about the HS and HS+ not being hardened though.
Apr 25 2019
Approved if we add in a little (requires adapter) to the dual extruder v3 tool head under the compatible add-ons in the final draft of the spec sheet.
Jan 23 2019
@DaniAO Ahh my bad, missed that. Either way, I don't we'd have any major issues with the Quiver not being compatible with the galaxG enclosure.
@DaniAO I agree with Megan, I don't think this will be needed for the Quiver. Are we not also working on a vacuum formed enclosure as well?
Jan 9 2019
@DaniAO I like it a lot, especially the multi colored filament sensor, really good idea. Do the labels on the tube slide around at all though, that's probably my only concern?
Jan 8 2019
I would be worried about the interior of the tube not being smooth enough and generating drag on the filament, which could impact the print. Not sure if it's a legitimate concern or not.
Dec 26 2018
I personally would want to go a bit overboard with the identification. One of our big features is that the printers are incredibly easy to use, almost idiot proof. While this wouldn't be a major irritation, I could see it as something that would pop up in technical support as a common "issue".
Oct 30 2018
@DaniAO I got a chance to speak with one of my contacts who is ordering these enclosures. The big features that they really like are, the fact that the enclosure is large enough to also cover the filament reel and that it has a door on the front for easy access. Additionally as the enclosure is rigid it does a fair job of keeping wandering hands away. While the nylon enclosure does cover the entire printer, the fact that it's soft is a big factor for them.
Oct 24 2018
I'm going to reach out to our customer whom is purchasing the majority of these and see if I can get an idea of what the future might hold with regards to more enclosures.
Considering whom is purchasing the majority of these enclosures from us, I don't think a price increase of $100 would make a large difference to them.
@jessica Did Liteworld give reasons for the price point increase?
I just received a purchase order requesting two of these enclosures. They are not looking for delivery of these items until early January but we'll need to order more as we only have one enclosure left in stock. They ordered this based on a quote so we'll have to honor the lower pricing for this order. I did briefly mention to my contact that the price was likely to change in the future, but I gave no specifics.
Oct 18 2018
So I'm now hearing about the new vacuum formed enclosure that we're pushing towards. Does this have potential to replace Liteworld enclosure?
Oct 16 2018
Oct 11 2018
What would we be raising the price to? I'm not 100% certain that I'll be able to actively sell these to customers but as we are already working with them on potentially fixing another issue they have with our printers, networking issues, this might still be a valuable product to offer them. The big reason they went for this is that it's both rigid and encloses the entire printer, filament spool and all. The addition of the fan with a filter was an added bonus that they rather liked.
Aug 15 2018
@adam Can we get a full BOM for what this adapter is going to contain? I'd like to have a small write up about this product so I can accurately describe it. I read through the discourse thread and from what I can tell it's a single printed part with a couple of inserts and a cable harness. Is that all it is?
I've had a couple of resellers, The 3D Connectors and Laser Concepts, indicate interest in this product as they were going through their websites and updating different products. When adding new products in the past, they've needed:
Jan 19 2018
Aug 28 2017
Is this feature only available in 2.6.25? I can't find it in 2.6.23.
Aug 25 2017
I only get that second sentence if I'm using a preset profile. If I make changed to the layer height manually that second sentence disappears even if I use the same layer height as in the preset profile.
Aug 24 2017
I believe it may not have been properly overwriting the previous Gcode, but I'm not 100% entirely certain as I would typically change the orientation of the new print to verify that it was different, and it would successfully print with the new orientation but still having the old bed temperature. I can now successfully set the initial bed temperature and have it properly set in the saved Gcode but the only setting I changed was under the settings visibility. I ensured that all settings were made visible and after that I tried overwriting the Gcode again and it succeeded properly. I do not see how changing this setting would affect it so I believe it was actually user error.
Aug 23 2017
Aug 18 2017
Aug 17 2017
I solved this problem by opening up the SD card in the file manager. It will then be recognized in Cura 2.
Aug 10 2017
Extruders have been switched so swap the offset numbers. Extruder 2 is now Extruder 0. Extruder 1 is still Extruder 1.
Aug 9 2017
This issues was resolved by changing the machine settings under the extruder 1 and 2 tabs. Extruder 1 settings should be Nozzle X Offset: 6.5mm and Nozzle Y Offset: 0.0mm. Extruder 2 settings should be Nozzle X Offset: -6.5mm and Nozzle Y Offset: 0.0mm. The previous settings were for the v2 dual extruder which was why I was having such results.
Aug 4 2017
I'm now discovering that this is not only with merged builds. The same issues will occur with a single object. Designating the support structure to be created with the second extruder will result in the same issue. The part will print fine but the support structure is now offset from the build.
Here is the Gcode for the current print job.