E3D has said that they can do 500g, or 1kg with the motion slowed down, using their motion system. Those were limits of the motion system though, so potentially more could be done. Additionally, the spring could be changed out to increase the weight limit even further.

I am looking at higher temperature plastic bristle brushes, since we will now be using higher temperatures and higher temp materials with this machine.

E3D is working with their supplier to get higher temperature motors

E3D toolchanger switch is rated for 85C which should be acceptable

Limit switch limit is 85C, which should be fine

One issue with the previously discussed option of using LAN to flash is that LAN needs to be physically remove-able for military, as far as I am aware

We are not looking at capacitive leveling presently, but we will likely want to find a way to do automatic nozzle offset calibration. Capacitive or not, this will likely require a pretty clean nozzle

Redesign has changed the situation with those parts to the point of invalidating this.

This was done a while ago, and the decision was made to use a different extruder.

Also see T6544 which stalled because there wasn't a clear answer on what was good and what was bad, just arbitrary limits to deny a certain % of parts.

@kent I don't see making drawings for every commodity screw and washer to be a very reasonable request. I think instead we could capture all of the information for that inside of a BOM in an assembly drawing such as the one requested in T9251, or through another means of declaring the standards that apply instead of making custom drawings to global standards for 32 commodity parts.

I was asked to clarify if what was shown in the last part falls under notes 3&4 of the drawing, regarding edge breaks. No, these lines are not edge breaks. Edge breaks are only de-burring touch-ups along the sharp corners of a part where two surfaces meet.

Several of our vendors remake the CAD files to work with due to poor compatibility with the FreeCAD generated files, from what I have heard.

According to diff, the hibiscus repo file and the kangaroopaw file are indeed identical. The only difference between those files and the re-export I had done are the filename and time/date of export internal to the file. Therefore, I suspect the re-export did not solve the issue, but one of the other file types did. Can we ask them to check what worked for them before?

I went to diff the steps to see if they were the same, and noticed I had a file marked "epocreexport". Checked my emails and found the following from May 7th:

FreeCAD cannot do parasolid. We only have iges and step for options that shops are likely to be able to use. We can see if they can work with iges, or try a fresh export of step to see if that works better for them.

I cannot see T3450 in order to check the history on this. I believe I recall that being closed as we were struggling to hit demand at the time and it was determined the change at the time would hurt that temporarily, which we wanted to avoid. If it is still an issue and we are at a better place to handle it now, that seems like a good thing for CO.

Testing the new firmware @marcio sent me, I have had 5 timeouts and 0 restarts or freezes. During my 139 and 135 testing I got 0 timeouts.

I just repeated the same steps as my last post, but on 135 instead of 139, and this time the machine reset itself instead of locking up.

I just froze on the change filament screen, extruder 2 heated, running continuous. 139, production unit. was holding steady at 220 prior to freeze, thermal runaway occurred after freeze.

@kent on PP-FP0170 are we going to want to also change the masking area callouts on page 4 to match this new notation scheme?

Tested, looks perfect. Great work, thank you!

Collagen profile has been tested. Changes from alginate profile are:
Line width - 0.16 (used a different size needle)
Infill Overlap Percentage - 50%
Flow/Initial layer flow rate - 100%

@cmerot As this seems to be something that will occur on all machines under certain conditions that just happened to be noticed on the floor just now, I was asked to have you weigh in with your thoughts on how we should proceed with this.

This seems to take excessive force to rack it enough to have it happen. It took me a while to replicate, I have to strain a little to make it happen, and I can't do it reliably. There was a theory that it was due to the tab on the Z upper deflecting, but I have taken some videos and that appears to happen regardless of if the click happens or not. This click is a sound I have heard before occasionally in prototypes, and I also just tested another production unit we have over here, and I was able to get the clicking even prior to reaching Z-max.

@anolen made some edits to the initial alginate profile, which resulted in the profile attached here. During the print using that profile, she also noted the following possible improvements that has not yet been implemented or tested:
Reduce wall & infill overlap
Reduce speed by 1mm/s
turn travel-combing off

Confirmed single nozzle extruder to right washer center at x293 y-14. Thats 3 production dual extruders and 1 single extruder confirmed on this machine.

@karrad I did verify my Y axis location.

For the record, that machine was one I got from Steven, who told me it was a production unit. I have not made any modifications to it aside from a blower shroud replacement for testing.

Change order ticket is T7856

I think we just need to remove it from the BOM. I can get a change order submitted a little later.

Material printing has same off-gassing concerns as ABS.

@karrad I tested just now by setting to toolhead 2, connecting to the machine, switching to prepare, and then switching back to monitor. The issue was still present. Firmware 2.0.0.116, Cura 3.6.9.

@MikeR from Kent, when discussing design review of machined fixtures prior to fabricating them "For now, the plan is to leave the process as is, and revisit this issue with our new Manufacturing Engineer."

The call with TVF for material safety and ventilation will be at 10am next Wednesday, 6/5/19.

regarding ventilation for the furnace - "Venting is encouraged for inside use-- Here in the foundry we have what is essentially equivalent to a bathroom fan for venting purposes. If you are using the unit in a well ventilated area a ventilation system will not be required."

Here is a spreadsheet of necessary items and costing based around Virtual Foundry filament and the furnaces they offer. Note that there are two pages based around 2 different furnace sizes which influences how large of a part we could process.

I have received confirmation from BASF that they see various options for sintering environments, but the catalytic debind has no alternatives for their materials. They did say however that they intend to sell the filament with a deal from their own sintering vendors which you would just mail the printed parts into, instead of expecting people to invest in the equipment and testing.

Upon my arrival to the show, which was after the unboxing, setup, and some initial adjustments I proceeded to do the following to get it working:

MTIXTL responded that they no longer offer that furnace. I am discussing other options they have.

RFQ sent for https://www.mtixtl.com/GSL-2000X-HV.aspx

I have gone through the final production BOM and found items that were not included in the previous BOMs I was working off of. This is the new list of items we need RoHS documentation for:

Solar has responded with $275,000.00 as the price for their furnace.

@DaniAO Yes

The Virtual Foundry has responded with pricing for their various chamber size options.

RFQs sent to Virtual Foundry, solarmfg, and another I found at https://vacuum-furnaces.com/laboratory-furnaces-series-50

According to the BASF Ultrafuse 316LX datasheet I am looking at, sintering can be done in pure hydrogen or vacuum, so we can probably do that with the same furnace in vacuum. The vacuum furnaces that I am seeing are also listed as able to do inert gases. For hydrogen, such a furnace would require additional safeties. I think we should stick with vacuum unless we have need to test gases, just for the sake of not dealing with the gases, but we would have that ability. The BASF material does use a special debind process that also raises concerns due to airborne acids, but in theory could also be done in the same type of furnace. Virtual Foundry materials seem to do a thermal debind that is just contained in part of their sintering cycle, which simplifies things a lot.