Talk:Orca v020

From RepRap
Revision as of 11:07, 27 July 2011 by Danielpublic (talk | contribs) (Re: whether it';s a "true reprap" or not:)
Jump to: navigation, search

New Users, please beware that "Orca" is:

Re: it's "Experimental status:

  • experimental - it's only been produced at Mendel-Parts ( a commercial outfit), and has not been indepenantly verified as to its capabilities, quality, repeatability, etc.
--Buzz ( Core Reprap team member, and Wiki Admin ).
  • not experimental anymore - its been produced on alot of locations already *also outside Mendel-Parts*.
10+ users (most indepently from Mendel-Parts.com ) have verified its capabilities, quality, repeatibility.
And they were very happy and very impressed, they like Orca much, much more then Mendels, building/working/printing with it etc.
For that reason we yesterday decided to remove the experimental note, however some reprap users dont agree 
and put the above message on this page today, simply put: 
I hate politics, but if you change this page, make sure you know what you are talking about!
--Camiel


Re: whether it';s a "true reprap" or not:

  • not entirely a Reprap ( ie it is not self-replicating ) as it currently requires approximately 20+ laser-cut parts in order to be assembled, and we can not yet print laser-cutters. Mendel and Darwin did not "require" a laser-cutter. I've personally made two Mendels, and never was a laser-cutter used at all.  :-(
--Buzz ( Core Reprap team member, and Wiki Admin ).

(Standard) Mendels also needs lasercut parts, (if you need 5, you also need a lasercuter.. and we cannot print those).
But I dont have time to play this game, some people work for a better world, some people just like to complain..

--Camiel.
  • Alt. to using a lasercutter as main manufacturing method of mentioned parts.

Could be to use electroetching (wiki/forum-thread/.pdf/video) ? I guess a sufficiently advanced reprap-entity and/or relation between biological/technological entities could utilize some fluids, sweat and tears from the first and "a bit" of electricity from the latter to make some offspring. Hm.. I guess that could be interpreted wrongly.

--danielpublic

Re: whether the design is in need of change

The Core reprap team hope that both the above issues will be resolved soon, and are pleased to see another RepRap variation taking shape, but it's early-days for this new design, and if you want a tried-and-tested model, we currently recommend either a "Prusa Mendel" or a "Classic/Sells Mendel", not this one. Please also note that there is currently only one supplier of parts for this model, and they are a commercial outfit. ( That may suit you, as support should be better, or it may concern you, as it potentially means increased vendor lock-in).

--Buzz ( Core Reprap team member, and Wiki Admin ).

We @ mendel-parts.com recommend Orca over the standard Mendel, because its so much easier to build, to work on / better manual etc.. in short: people are much more happy with an Orca, it prints better and is faster to setup (user comments, not my comment).

--Camiel.


Re: whether this is a problem or not

In General most (normal) users dont care about building a 3D printer, that is not their goal, they want to print 3D.

--Camiel.

Camiel, you statement depends entirely on who *you* consider "normal". I personally think there is no "normal", and would not like to impose restrictions on people without at least making them aware of the choices they are making. Eg: If a user wants a non-replicating printer, then that's OK, but it's not a 'RepRap', it's a 'RepStrap'. In this particular case, your 'Orca' 3D printer is clearly moving toward the latter category( ie RepStrap), by your own admission... and that *will* be a concern for some people, so it's best that they be informed about it up-front.

--Buzz. ( Core Reprap team member, and Wiki Admin ).



Something else I want to explain for once: running a production line of 6 or more printers is something else then having 1 or 2 printers.
We run in completely different problems, we find alot more issues etc. Printing 18h each day on 10 printers, or printing 18h a week on one printer is totally not comparable.