4 simultaneous extruders?
-
New to 3D printing. I am looking for a 3D printer, during my search I was planning to going the prusa route... but I need something more like IDEX? I want it to have 3-4 extruders to print multiple copies at the same time. Flashforge has 2 but its expensive and I could get 3 printers for that price!
How can multi extruder be set up? Can Prusa or prusa XL be upgraded for this? If not what is a good printer with decent size bed for this?
And is duet the board or is it firmware or both? I need help sorting this information out and be pointed in the right direction so I can build a multiple extruder machine.
Also what would be the highest possible extruder count?
-
@theundercat Duet has supported IDEXY (independent X and Y) for a few years, and there are at least two IDEXY 3D printer designs now. To the best of my knowledge, Duet + RRF is then only open source platform supporting IDEXY. We plan to introduce some exciting new capabilities for IDEXY machines in RRF 3.5.
Tool changing and IDEX or IDEXY are not incompatible. RepRapFirmware already supports this combination in theory, although I don't know of any actual machines that combine both.
-
@theundercat said in 4 simultaneous extruders?:
I want it to have 3-4 extruders to print multiple copies at the same time.
Some people tried to use two extruders in copy mode, but that requires a really flat bed ( which also means no gantry sag). Four nozzles would be a nightmare.
Usually we use mesh leveling for beds, which are not so flat, but that doesn't work with more than one nozzle at a time.
As @DC42 mentioned, there will be features in RRF3.5, which hopefully allows us to use multiple independent tools simultaneously.
My hashPrinter can't wait for it
-
I am walking this path for a while now - an IQEX… in process of building a new one, based on what i’ve learned in past 2 years with it.
To start I used cheap i3 style IDEX (Tenlog D3 was my choice), threw out crappy boards and did height adjustable toolmounts (very important). Used Duet2 + Duex5. Then just doubled the IDEX axis and viola, got IQEX… at this point, i use one as IDEX and one as IQEX. Daily.
So this is totally doable and huge advantage when you want high output.
What you want is take time and assemble the thing VERY precisely. Everything square and BOTH X rails EXACTLY parallel and square to Y and Z. Not a huge challenge, but I for example didn’t think of this when building first time.. fixed that, learned something. Making a jig on which you assemble the X gantry so that both X linear rails sit flat and then you torque everything up helps a bunch.
Whoever relies on meshbed levelling is doing stuff wrong. Yeah it’s nice, but you tram the machine and level the damn flat bed. Then you print on it with absolutely no problems day in and day out.Disadvantage: with i3 style, Y axis is only one so while you can do multiplication, you can only mirror in X direction. Not huge disadvantage & still has better output at the end of the day than any “i printed a benchy in 10 minutes” gimmick. Machine is not realistically encloseable tho.
Works absolutely fantastic for about 1000 bucks printer.What i am doing now is a box design - so XY plane is moving and bed is on the Z. It uses (well it will eventually) 2 stacked double markforged kinematics. Something similar to Muldex printer, but doubled.
Is it worth it? Not really sure. Should be fast as hell compared to my current i3 IQEX. More silent for sure. Encloseable. Insane output. Etc. Still, if concept works, then i will have to scale the design up to like at least 600x600 mm buildplate so this monsters electronics and build price are justified.
If this triggers your heart, i do posts from time to time on my FB group (“Marx group”. As in Marks’ group, not in marxistic way
) -
There is a lady called something like Justine who built an amazing, large, machine capable of printing 4 copies simultaneously using Duet boards and who posted a year or two back on these forums. It used an X shaped gantry with an extruder mounted on each of the 4 points of the X. As an engineer, I can appreciate the difficulties that had to be overcome to get all 4 nozzles at exactly the same position relative to the (very large) build plate (in the Z direction). Using a single Z axis, also meant that the build plate had to be flat and level without using firmware compensation when using 4 nozzles which would be at different XY coordinates. The advantage of her design meant that simple kinematics such as Cartesian or CoreXY could be used because the tools were not strictly independent other than extruder motors.
