hckrnws

The images and video you're looking for are here: https://hackaday.com/2024/12/28/full-color-3d-printing-with-...

In this case, the real work originated in Michael’s TeachingTech video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J1wz8S9rTI8

The real work originated with the PolyDye project. TeachingTech isn't a bad channel, but he mostly demonstrates tech invented by other people. I'm not sure I understand the point of commenting a link to his video that is already linked within the first paragraph of the linked article.

>but he mostly demonstrates tech invented by other people.

In the video it's stated that the PolyDye creator is a 4 year patron(Patreon?) to TeachingTech and it's a collaboration for the demonstration.

AND the linked has changed to the PolyDye github instead of the blog spam.

You're absolutely right; the real credit goes to the PolyDye project. However, it's TeachingTech's video that made PolyDye explode in the last week. Hackaday is just regurgitating what is explained in TT's video. I guess I'm just a bit tired of that page, and what amounts to basically blog spam.

This seems the actual future of color 3D printing. Filament manufacturers will develop increasingly better translucent filaments and 3D printer manufacturers will seamlessly integrate the method on the printers.

I have a Bambu P1S with the multi filament upgrade, and while great for several motives (keeping 4 spools at hand dried and ready), I never use it for actual multi material printing due to it’s slowness and wasteness.

As someone who runs a small business selling niche 3d printed accessories [1] - the ability to perform multicolor printing on the first layer is really important for giving a more finished look (no layer lines). I wonder if this new method would support being able to color the bottom layer (the layer that is in direct contact with the build plate).

[1]: https://pluriboom.com/

This is a really nice idea. I never thought of using it "the other way around". This is nice for tags, for instance - where we live we have this little tag we should put on our mailboxes so that we don't get publicity.

Yeah the AMS is a nice extra but not at all practical for most usecases.

I use it sometimes for badges with text, you only need a few layer changes then which makes it ok. But big multicolour objects nope.

Doesn't Bambu have "Purge to infill" in its Orca fork?

I never did try that. But I'm figuring out it needs a fairly big model (or several copies) to work properly and for the filament change time to be acceptable.

All in all, other than completely changing filament after a specific layer, I don't see the shortcome outweighing the benefits.

But in this case I've mentioned it becomes very handy. For instance, to print a PLA 1st layer for bead adhesion and then print ABS on top of it.

I recall seeing a similar idea to this on a 3D printer that used sheets of paper for the layers. It would (workflow from memory) print with high saturation on to a stack of paper then drag them in to an aligned stack while cutting the layers out using a drag knife and gluing them. I wish I could recall who made the thing, but it was quite impressive. Main target use case was architectural work.

3D printing via paper sheet stacks was one of the first 'rapid prototype' technologies. It was around in the automative industry at least in the mid 1980's, and was called LOM - Laminated Object Manufacturing. The machine I saw would unroll glue-backed paper onto a plate, laser-cut the layer into it along with laser cutting a consistent grid pattern everywhere outside the part. Then repeat for all the layers.

This took forever (literally days for a big part) but when it was done you would get this giant block that felt like essentially a glue-up wood countertop. You would then bust away all the cube pieces on the outside, revealing the 3D part inside. The part would have this grid line pattern on it from where the waste cube cuts intersected the final part. You could then varnish the part and you'd have a pretty much rock solid, heavy reproduction straight from a computer model.

I know that these were used for vac-forming parts straight off them, and also as patterns for sand castings. It was interesting as this tech has been pretty much erased, it's even hard to find pictures of it these days.

Anyway. I don't ever recall ever seeing one that printed color onto the paper however, but I'm sure this was something that was experimented with.

Here is a 1991 paper describing the tech, which had already been around for a few years by then I think:

https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/server/api/core/bitstrea...

Impossible Objects has refined this idea by using stacks of printed powder onto fiber sheets. They get stacked and sintered into the final object, and the fiber itself acts as reinforcement.

It makes 3D printing at massive scale possible: https://impossible-objects.com/3d-printers/

That's slick! I wonder what sorts of jobs end up being cost effective on it. Like, how much does the media used to print the example job in the video cost? There's no clue on the website as to the cost of the media, so I'm guessing you have to have a pretty good reason to need this particular technology (simply speed?)

This was the one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mcor_Technologies_Ltd Seems they went out of business.

Video here https://youtu.be/2DRJ2oUK4-E

I remember this, the coolest part was that the feedstock was just glue, inkjet cartridges and A4 printer paper

This is similar to the RizeOne, I have one. Tjmhe company went under but they're still supported by some suppliers.

https://www.dynamism.com/rize/rize-one.html?srsltid=AfmBOooo...

Great project. This seems to be bringing the technology of the DaVinci Color [mini] printers from XYZprinting to the OSS world. Those 3D printers were quite expensive.

Very interesting step. I wonder what will become the standard for color 3d printing. Mixing 3 base colors in a mixing chamber probably will waste a lot of purge filament.

Mixing filaments has been tested and wastes an enormous amount of filament, and has accuracy issues with color and deposition (like almost all regular multicolor getting clean seperstions or transitions is hard)

Is it possible to use this as an alternative 2D paper printer as well? Or is the position granularity too large?

Asking as there's been many discussions over the years desiring an open source paper printer and while this would be a rather slow and cumbersome approach it could be useful for those who do 3d printing a fair amount and print to paper on rare occasions.

That's cool, and certainly more accurate than blending filament.

Anyone have data on layer adhesion?

(I have a spool of Royal Blue Prusament that has the worst layer adhesion ever, for some reason. Fresh in my mind. :)

If I remember correctly, Royal Blue is a PLA blend. Are you using that profile or just Prusament PLA? The temperatures are significantly different (25°C difference), and so are the speeds (20-30% difference).

I really want this on my bambu <3

One of the downsides to a mostly-closed system like Bambu, it makes adding solutions like this difficult.

True but I mean I wish Bambu would bring something like this as an option :)

I'm very happy with bambu. I love 3D printing but I hate messing with 3D printers, constantly tuning and fixing everything. I really despise that stuff. So bambu is perfect for me. I would never install such a kit anyway. I just want to buy a printer with it and for it to just work.

I know many other people at the makerspace who love tinkering with their printers but it's not for me. Until I got my bambu printers my prints were pretty bad because I didn't put any effort into my printers. Always having misaligned beds etc. I just can't be bothered with that shit. I just used really thick rafts to make things slightly more manageable. They mostly have creality and prusa ones.

> I wish Bambu would bring something like this as an option

And that's what you're left with, wishing a company would meet your needs. With a Prusa, you just go ahead and add the thing and tinker as you wish. Modern Mk4 printers have all the reliability features you are familiar with from Bambu, with the notable exception that they aren't uploading your GCODE to a chinese cloud provider.

Nah then I just wouldn't upgrade it anyway. Or I'd buy the kit and leave it collecting dust like I did with the heat bed upgrade for my old printer. Eventually I did install it but it was years later. The company (printrbot) was long bankrupt by then :')

I just really hate tinkering with 3D printers.

And you don't have to upload, you can just use an sd card. Not that I do because I dont care so much if they see it.

I know prusas have their advantages but so do bambus. They're just different advantages, they're for a different audience. I'm more bambu's audience, not the prusa one. Nothing wrong with that. I just want click and play and the same goes for features such as this. If it needs too much tinkering I either don't do it or I'll do a half assed attempt and get frustrated because it doesn't work right.

And the notable exception that they cost 1.5x as much for the same capabilities.

I would consider extendibility a capability, whether you consider that worth the price difference is up to you.

For me no, definitely not.

The Core ONE is the first Prusa I would actually consider buying. But it's twice as expensive as a Bambu P1S and lacks various features that are optional on the prusa but included on the P1S. Like air filtering, the chamber cam (I know it's bad but good enough for me). And their alternative for the AMS (they call it the MMU) is way less sophisticated, it doesn't do full roll retraction or include a drybox for example. Finally, I have more faith in injection-molded parts than 3D printed ones. They're smoother, more precise, more solid.

Now the extendibility is a big feature but it's not something I would use. I want a printer that I can unpack and go and have minimal maintenance and tinkering on. My hobby is about printing things, the printer itself is not my hobby. It's a tool and it should just work.

So no, so far Bambu is and remains the the go-to brand for me. I have a P1S + AMS and also an A1 Mini, I think it's amazing how much value you get for your money at 180 euro. I actually use the A1 Mini more lately when I have something small to print due to the easily exchangable hotend (I often print small high-detail stuff on it with the 0,2mm nozzle). And it's a lot quieter than the P1S.

And like others mentioned, Prusa is becoming a lot less open source. In the video he mentioned it is because of the Chinese clones which makes some sense but still...

> Prusa

abandoned open source for their most recent products... that plus the fact that bambu added lan-only-mode makes the purchase decision easy.

The main reason not to buy bambu.

Anyone taking bets on how long until the cease and desist from stratasys rolls in?

Very steep price, for not much more you could get a Bambu A1 Mini and AMS

$200 seems quite cheap for full-color capability. The two technologies are not really comparable.