But *reading* OpenSCAD is still hard, and I kind of wish somehow it wasn’t, even though I can’t imagine any way to improve it.ĬNC’s tend to be much more accurate and repeatable than FDM 3d printers. And on top of that, I’ve learned a lot of tricks to reverse-engineer an object. And it really has improved as I have learned a few comment styles (like starting each module with a description of the axes if it’s at all in doubt). I figure people who use OpenSCAD interactively might have a different experience with it. But every time, if the shape is at all complex, there is a point when I first start where I am just completely lost in all of the relative transformations and if I’m looking at a cube() or linear_extrude(), I can’t tell really which part it is or how I want to edit it. It’s very usable and I can usually edit a project even if I come back to it after a few years. Nested translate()/rotate(), or global variables controling multmatrix(), or so on. I use comments and factoring, and I’ve tried a bunch of different approaches to parameterizing components in a project.
But I do find that it tends to be a lot easier to write than to read. One thing, though, that is kind of vexing for me still…I *love* OpenSCAD, though there is a basic limit to its ability to express complex shapes which sometimes stymies me. If you just want the product, have you considered Etsy? I don’t resent the presence of less-technical enthusiasts, but it’s like the guy you know who buys a 12″ dob for his first telescope because he read about a comet in the newspaper…you know that thing is just gonna sit in his garage and gather dust, a lingering source of vague embarrassment and disappointment. If you aren’t interested in becoming an advanced user of CAD and slicers, I think it’s very unlikely that 3D printing will have much to offer you. Computers are far enough along, the advantages of computing should not be limited to a few hobbyists….but 3D printing is very much not to that point yet. I see a few comments here that seem to trend in the direction of saying everyone shouldn’t need to be a programmer just to use a 3D printer, and I just can’t agree. I don’t actually use pre-created objects too often, but when I am forced to (like to print replacement parts for my reprap), I want OpenSCAD source! I can adjust parameters for my printer or for the screws I happen to have on hand, and I can edit it…truly, why would I re-print something if I didn’t have an improvement already in mind? Hear hear! I agree entirely with Elliot Williams. So even if the markets for 3D prints can solve the reliability problems, through customer reviews or requirements of extensive documentation, they’ll never be able to solve the one-size-fits-nobody issue. Making a headphone hook that’s customizable is key. Nobody knows exactly how thick your desk is but you, after all. Using the source plays to the customizability of 3D printing, which is perhaps its strongest suit, in my mind.
Openscad oval download#
If you download an STL with ten M8 bolt holes, you could widen them all in a modeling program, but if you’ve got the source code, it’s as easy as changing a single variable. Whenever possible, I prefer models in OpenSCAD. How can the designer work around your particular situation? Different slicers handle corners differently, making inner surfaces shrink to varying degrees. There’s almost no way a designer can know if you’re overextruding on your first layers or not. You want to be sure that the modeler at least took these considerations into account.īut when your parts have strength requirements, fits, and tolerances, it gets even worse. With resin printers, you need to be careful about trapped volumes of uncured resin. Fused-deposition printers can only print on top of previous layers, and have a distinct grain, so you need to watch out for overhangs and print orientation. Only download models that have been printed at least once, have decent documentation about things like layer height, filament type, and support, and to the best of your abilities, be critical about the ability to fabricate the part at all.
It pays to be choosy, and all of ’s suggestions hold in the “free” market as well.
They are a supremely mixed bag, and even though you’re not paying for the model, you’re paying in printing time, filament, and effort.
Openscad oval free#
It got me thinking about my own experience, albeit with all of the free 3D models out there. His basic point: if you don’t know what you’re getting until you’ve purchased it, and there’s no refund policy, how can you tell if your money is being well spent? It’s a serious problem for these nascent markets, because when customers aren’t satisfied they won’t come back. This week our own wrote a thought-provoking piece on buying and selling 3D-printer models.
0 kommentar(er)
