automaker in use

[pelgrim @pelgrim]

The links are working this morning, I’ll just copy the content here to simplify this discussion.

Re: CEL Robox Support

Postby CEL-UK » Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:10 am
Hi This is Chris from the Robox Team, We’ve been in contact with Simplify 3D team and are requesting some integration for all the extra hardware a Robox has. We are still waiting to hear back from them, fingers crossed they will support us. I purchased the software on return from the TCT show were a number of the other manufactures suggested that simplify 3D slice engine was one of the best. my early test show they were right and some of the gcode I used is extremely tidy and produces neat prints.

Support for CEL Robox.

Postby CEL-UK » Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:39 am
After purchasing and testing a copy of Simplify 3D I’m extremely impressed with the quality of the slice engine. I would love to see it support the CEL Robox so other Robox users could use it more easily.
Robox has some extra hardware that would need considering when integrating it.
- No need to add temperatures, the reels hold all the temps required. M103 calls layer one temp, M104 call normal layer temp. M109 wait to reach previous called temp etc. (S### after any temp overrides that on reel)
- M139 calls bed layer one temp, M140 call layer normal bed temp. M190 wait to reach previous called temp etc. (S### after any temp overrides that on reel)
- M170 call temp from filament profile or reel to set ambient build temp. (M170 S## over rides and sets ambient temp)
- T0, T1 select between nozzle 1 (0.3mm) and nozzle 2 (0.8mm)
- the B axis open or closes the needle valve for the nozzle selected. example, “G0 B0″ is nozzle closed, “G0 B1″ is nozzle open, “G0 B0.5″ is nozzle half open.
- E axis is extruder 1, D axis is extruder 2 ( the dual nozzle head can accept upto 2 material feeds simultaneously.)
- Robox works in volume not filament length, setting the diameter of the filament to 1.1283791670955125738961589031215 does the same and the firmware works out how much length to push based of on the parameters set on the reel or material profile. these can all be changed during a print and again the firmware will instantly adjust material federate accordingly.
- G36 Move filament until slip [E / D F] E = Extruder 1 (mm³), D = Extruder 2 (mm³), F=Speed mm³/min. This will feed the specified volume at the specified feedrate, until the extruder index wheel detects that the filament is no longer moving.
- G37 Unlock door S = Override Safe Temperature (Bed) (°C) This will unlock the door immediately if no S value is present, or allow the door unlock at a specified bed temperature. e.g. G37 S50 will unlock the door when the bed temperature reaches 50°C.
- G38 Level gantry Using the input from two G28 Z probes at least 100mm apart in the X direction, this command automatically levels the gantry to make it parallel to the bed.
- G39 Level bed (compensate Z according to Y) Using the input from two G28 Z probes at least 100mm apart in the Y direction, this command automatically drives the Z axis during printing to keep the nozzle the same distance from the bed.
- M120 Load filament [E D] E = Extruder 1, D = Extruder 2. This executes the loading sequence for the specified extruder, however it is rarely required as this is triggered by movement of the indexing wheel when the output switch is open (i.e. no filament loaded).
- M121 Unload filament [E D] E = Extruder 1, D = Extruder 2. This executes the unloading sequence for the specified extruder when the output switch is closed (i.e. filament loaded).
- M128 Head lights off This turns the LEDs on the bottom of the printing head off.
- M129 Head lights on This turns the LEDs on the bottom of the printing head on.
- M909 Set filament slip detection threshold (mm) This command defines the difference between how far filament has been told to travel, and how far it travels in order to trigger a filament slip error. i.e. if this value is set to 2mm, and the filament is told to travel 10mm, a error will be triggered if it moves <8mm.

Anyway, will try and bash this out with their programmers when I get a response from my emails later last week, fingers crossed.

java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards

[pelgrim @pelgrim]

I watched the youtube link, this software would be great to work with,
to me it really looks to have “the best of both worlds”,
these worlds being the end user who doens’t want to look much at settings
and the specialised user who wants control of everything,
and everything in between those 2 extremes.

If this is the road ahead, I think I’ll wait for it,
I really don’t feel like switching between slic3r, cura
and “blindly” messing around with rather abstract settings until I get something decent out of my robox.

java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards

[Clicky @clicky]

@jabberwocky no question I will invest $140 if they support Robox. I completely agree with what you said about software lagging behind hardware. I want to be honest and say that current software is really nice and slick and worth Robox, but as you said - there’s far, far more to it…

BTW my comment was more along the lines of Simplify3d asking money for their software so it should be them to invest time to understand Robox and add support for it… But not sure if they’re going to be interested in it. On the other side CEL doing work for Simplify3d so Simplify3d can sell their software is again unlikely… So, it is lose/lose situation at the moment - and we are those who lose

 

[pelgrim @pelgrim]

I don’t agree Clicky,
if CEL can keep their front-end and use the slicer engine of simplify3d,
there can be a win-win for both.
CEL can provide superiour quality with the simplify3d slicer/robox combination
and save development time/cost while simplify3d can make a deal with CEL
about the software licence for each sold robox.

java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards

[Clicky @clicky]

@pelgrim Fair enough. If CEL is going to invest in Simplify3d and distribute it with Robox - I am all for it. But it is CEL’s decision and not ours to spend their money.

I was only look it from perspective of Simplify3d directly supporting Robox as their own (Simplify3d’s) commercial venture. If CEL and Simplify3d do go in some relationship and Simplify3d starts supporting Robox because of it or CEL start distributing Simplify3d (or Simplify3d’s slicer) even better!

I only expressed my fear that it might not happen. Nor there’s a great likelihood that Simplify3d will support Robox on their own until there’s much more Robox users and they calculated that they (users) will buy their product. In both cases - not in near future…

PS - sorry to sound to pessimistic. Or maybe better ‘realistic’. I am an optimist by nature!

[pelgrim @pelgrim]

We both try to be optimistic and realistic I guess, you at least have the courage to print, I don’t.

One thing I want to add to your reply: Simplify3d can’t “support” robox on their own terms,
that’s what the closed source approach is all about. If they could, so could I,
and I really mean me and a few other programmers in this forum, it’s no rocket science to hack a
usb device and build further upon a slicer, just a hell lot of work and certainly a team effort.

I try to see things from both our side, the customer, and their side, the commercial business.
CEL has proven hardware skills and a customer base for it,
the right software is “out there”, minus some adjustments that can be dealt with,
from a business point of view it would be wise to cash in on the hardware and outsource the slicer
to a company that has proven skills in that department.
There is a mountain of work to be done and money to be invested around robox
that has little or nothing to do with software and is awaited for, eagerly.
The CEL-launched “feature requests” forum is a testimony to that.

java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards

[Clicky @clicky]

“One thing I want to add to your reply: Simplify3d can’t “support” robox on their own terms,
that’s what the closed source approach is all about. If they could, so could I,
and I really mean me and a few other programmers in this forum, it’s no rocket science to hack a
usb device and build further upon a slicer, just a hell lot of work and certainly a team effort.”

But from their forum you can see that they don’t need to! Chris did give them quite a nice explanation what’s the difference of Robox to other (more generic?) printers…

 

[pelgrim @pelgrim]

It’s not a question of knowledge, but of licences.

java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards

[Mark Dee @jabberwocky]

Here are my 2 cents to the above conversation:

1. Simplify 3d already supports a lot of printers, many of which traditionally use Slic3r.

2. Robox has a few extra bits of code to account for the innovation in the product. ‘Chris’ from CEL has alluded to these in the excerpt above.

3. The chaps at Simplify have undoubtedly got a Robox with them, and are probably ‘Opening’ it up using these extra snippets of code. I say undoubtedly because Farnell now sells Robox, and CEL have done a good job of promoting it across the globe. It makes sense for Simplify3d to invest a bit of time supporting the Robox. With the innovation in the hardware, they could get some extremely detailed prints when the two are married in harmony.

4. CEL is never going to give Simplify to its users for free, purely because of the costs associated. But they could strike a deal for the guys at Simplify to take over the dev of AM. That way, it is a win win solution. Oh that would be sooooooooo goood!!

5. Not all is lost. Patience is the game, and something will be revealed soon. CEL will lose serious inventors, and the future share of the 3d print market if it does not address the software issues. This hardware is good, and there IS potential!!!

CEL recognizes this, so I will wait for their stance to be revealed.

[pelgrim @pelgrim]

Haha, robox + software is 1 package and is paid for, there simply can’t be a discussion about that.
If CEL has to invest in their own software or in an external provider, that is so not my bill to pay.

java (EE), JavaFX, HTML, GIS) programmer, database wizard, framework inventor, looking for a job ! http://roboxing.com/wizards

[Clicky @clicky]

@pelgrim what licences are you talking about? (again)

Producing gcode is not licensed. Adding T0 and T1 (tool 0 and tool 1) is not patented by CEL… Not retracting filament and using what Chris explained on Simplify3d’s forum is, again, not anything trademarked, licensed, patented or anyhow protected - but public (as much as gcode is public) knowledge.

So, I can’t see Simplify3d producing Robox ‘friendly’ gcode being an issue!

And again, why would CEL cause an issue if third party slicer produces code that is ‘compatible’ with their printer?

[Mark Dee @jabberwocky]

Check this out! Straight from the horses mouth:

http://www.cel-robox.com/forums/topic/my-first-prints/#post-11826

AM is going to be implementing CURA quite soon.

This should be interesting…..exciting! wooo

[Author]

Posts