$179 3D printer

From comments in their forum they must already have beta tester units in the field:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/tiko3d/tiko-the-unibody-3d-printer/description

https://www.tiko3d.com/

I got my $299 (missed out on the $199 level) Kickstarter Micro 3D printer a little over a month ago. The $179 price of the Tiko was only for Kickstarter backers and I'd guess it might sell for $249 for everyone else.

I plan to go with an even larger (much larger) Kossel delta-type printer (kit) once I get word back from a local 3D printer group member about exactly what his setup is that I saw at a maker group meeting. I find I need much more z-axis build volume than I thought I would.

I backed this one, and should get my printer in January if they stay on schedule (which kickstarters rarely do!). I already have a bukito printer and it is nice enough, but the Tiko looks like it prints smoother and will print in ABS (mine only prints in PLA, which is a bear to smooth and sand). Looking forward to getting mine!

gpoehlein said:

I backed this one, and should get my printer in January if they stay on schedule (which kickstarters rarely do!). I already have a bukito printer and it is nice enough, but the Tiko looks like it prints smoother and will print in ABS (mine only prints in PLA, which is a bear to smooth and sand). Looking forward to getting mine!

Click to expand...

Yeah, it looks like I finally reached my price point buying a 3D printer one year too early. Then, it took a year to be delivered which puts its release to other than beta testers not even a year before it looks like the Tiko may be released (Nov 2015). I'd prefer the Tiko over the Micro 3D for many reasons besides just the fact that it's $120 cheaper than what I bought. Oh, well.

The Micro 3D can print other plastics besides PLA, but you need the heated bed for ABS which I'm not even sure they've released yet. The heated bed on the Tiko is an optional extra?

Anyway, I need a much larger z-axis build volume anyway, so I'll console myself with that thought.

The Tiko doesn't need a heated bed because it has a heated chamber. The print bed is some sort of flexible material that the printed plastic will adhere to but when you flex it (kind of like popping ice cubes from their trays), it pops right off the bed. That's why I can't print with ABS - there is no heated bed available for the bukito and the print volume is open.

gpoehlein said:

The Tiko doesn't need a heated bed because it has a heated chamber. The print bed is some sort of flexible material that the printed plastic will adhere to but when you flex it (kind of like popping ice cubes from their trays), it pops right off the bed. That's why I can't print with ABS - there is no heated bed available for the bukito and the print volume is open.

Click to expand...

Damn you, you just gave me two more reasons to be disappointed in what I've already got. I had assumed that the enclosure was just to prevent temperature variations from drafts from HVAC or whatever which is the reason it's done on other 3D printers. The Yossel delta printer kit I want is $650, so if the Tiko isn't too much more than $249 retail, I may just get one and live with the z-axis height so I can print ABS.

At least I didn't spend $2,849.99 on one of these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00SNM8VIK/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

The local public makerspace here has one and they've had the same level of luck as the many reviewers on Amazon. Constant extruder head clogs. You'd think a FIFTH generation design would be perfected. From conversations with other 3D printer owners/users, Makerbot has a management problem.

I also backed the Tiko. It will be my introduction to 3D printing (and drive my introduction to 3D CAD at home). I have much to learn.....

Based on what I have read on the bukobot forum (bukobot is the bukito' slightly brother), a lot of time extruder clogging can be caused by uneven or inconsistent filament. There are a lot of filament suppliers out there and quality can be REALLY spotty. In particular, Chinese filament is really cheap, but the diameter can vary quite a bit. The filament brand recommended by Deezmaker (the bukito' manufacturer) is Prototype Supply. You can get it from a couple different suppliers (don't remember who at the moment, but you can find out at their website). Their filament is not the cheapest, but it is consistent and works very well. I definitely recommend them.

As far as Makerbot is concerned, after watching the documentary about 3D printing, I learned how they changed drastically over the course of a couple years. A perfect example of how one dominant personality can take over a fledgling company's vision and drive off all the other founders.

BEC said:

I also backed the Tiko. It will be my introduction to 3D printing (and drive my introduction to 3D CAD at home). I have much to learn.....

Click to expand...

Depending on how cheap you are and whether you have any experience at programming, I really like OpenSCAD. All your objects are built by creating a program that describes you object with a series of computer code commands. That sounds clumsy, but it can be very elegant. The chief advantage is that with programmability comes flexibility. I just finished coding a program to create ogive nose cones from a series of conic sections described by the tangent ogive formulas. By using FOR loops, I can automate the process quite a lot. Plus, I can put a resolution factor in the program that changes the number of conic sections to speed up rendering (high res takes a long time to render, so lo res is great for debugging and testing a design). Finally, by describing my nose cone based on the diameter and length to diameter ratio, the program can scale a nose cone shape up or down to fit whatever tube I want. If I want to downscale the NC-50K down to BT-20 size, I just change the diameter and re-render.

I already created programs to create conical and elliptical nose cones, so the next step will be to combine all three into one master program where you tell it the ratio, diameter and shape and it generates the nose cone render for you.

Bottom line is that most other 3D CAD programs are either really clunky or expensive. Now that I understand how OpenSCAD works, it is becoming second nature to me - kind of like back when I used to program in BASIC on the TRS-80, Apple //e and PC using G-BASIC and Q-BASIC.

https://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/sto..._Printer_by_Tiny_Boy_Transparent_US_110V.html

Here is another entry in the sub $180 3D printer market. Shipping from Hong Kong does kick it up to $240 untill it is stocked in one of the US Hobby King warehouses.

gpoehlein said:

Depending on how cheap you are and whether you have any experience at programming, I really like OpenSCAD. All your objects are built by creating a program that describes you object with a series of computer code commands. That sounds clumsy, but it can be very elegant. The chief advantage is that with programmability comes flexibility. I just finished coding a program to create ogive nose cones from a series of conic sections described by the tangent ogive formulas. By using FOR loops, I can automate the process quite a lot. Plus, I can put a resolution factor in the program that changes the number of conic sections to speed up rendering (high res takes a long time to render, so lo res is great for debugging and testing a design). Finally, by describing my nose cone based on the diameter and length to diameter ratio, the program can scale a nose cone shape up or down to fit whatever tube I want. If I want to downscale the NC-50K down to BT-20 size, I just change the diameter and re-render.

I already created programs to create conical and elliptical nose cones, so the next step will be to combine all three into one master program where you tell it the ratio, diameter and shape and it generates the nose cone render for you.

Bottom line is that most other 3D CAD programs are either really clunky or expensive. Now that I understand how OpenSCAD works, it is becoming second nature to me - kind of like back when I used to program in BASIC on the TRS-80, Apple //e and PC using G-BASIC and Q-BASIC.

Click to expand...

Interesting thought. I've actually looked at that a little (based on your other posts mentioning it). It's been a long long time since I wrote any programs but I expect I could do it. My 3D CAD skills (from work) are rusty as I haven't been on CATIA since V3 and never really got any good at anything else but the even older ComputerVision CADDS3 (which is what we used on the 757 program a long time ago).

I'm not that cheap, but the fact that I bought (or hopefully bought) a sub-$200 3D printer to try it out is some indication I suppose.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will look a little closer.

gpoehlein said:

Bottom line is that most other 3D CAD programs are either really clunky or expensive. Now that I understand how OpenSCAD works, it is becoming second nature to me - kind of like back when I used to program in BASIC on the TRS-80, Apple //e and PC using G-BASIC and Q-BASIC.

Click to expand...

For anyone new I would suggest Autodesk Fusion 360. Currently free for non-commercial use, and is relatively easy to get started with. My only complaint is it is cloud based (which could be good for some, as it means it works on both MAC and PC)

Before anyone buys a 3D Printer I strongly suggest you play around and learn at least a little bit of CAD software first. If you don't like doing CAD, a 3D Printer is going to only be a novelty.

Also, any 3D printer under 1K is going to require a lot of tinkering. Despite what the marketing says, we have yet to see one in that price range which is anywhere near trouble free. The only relatively inexpensive ones I will recommend anymore are the Printrbots.

The super inexpensive machines have their place, but chances are very good you will spend more time working on your printer than printing with it.

Disclaimer: I'm a 3D Printer manufacturer for machines in the 4K price range.

Landru,

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll look at that one (though I'm a little leery of a cloud-based program just because my current internet connection at home is a bit flaky - another problem to work).

I fully expected to have to learn a new 3D modeling program (or two or three) in order to make any use of the Tiko (when it comes). And yes, at that price point it's either a major breakthrough or there will be tinkering involved. Either way I'll learn something.

Got My "Micro" 3D printer in May. but haven't had a lot of time to work with it yet. When I Backed this product I got it for 249.00. With the few pieces i've run the machine is just amazing! Will print up to approx. 5.5 x 5.5 x 5.5" which should be larger then anything I need to make in a single piece.

As for Programming. this machine works with just about any 3D software. Sketchup is one of the recommended products. Sketchup can be downloaded for Free and Sketchup-pro can be had for about 590.00. Have to say with the very short time I've been playing around with SketchUp i'm amazed at the quick learning curve.

Hope to be making lots of Micro and LPR parts very shortly.

Regarding OpenScad, it's been updated lately with an internal editor that includes syntax highlighting and other programming features, but I still have to recommend Notepad++ with OpenScad language files: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:167899 Besides syntax highlighting that Thing also adds autocomplete and in-line help.

For example, typing "tra", a couple arrows down the displayed list, and enter, gives me: "translate ([0, 0, 0]) rotate (a = [0, 0, 0]) cube (size = [1, 1, 1]);" - a combination I use pretty often, ready to fill in the values.

And typing "rotate(" gives the rotate help:

"rotate()
rotate (a = [x, y, z]) {...} - rotates child object 'a' degrees about the origin.
Also, rotate (a = deg, v = [x, y, z]) {...} - rotates the object 'a' degrees around the axis specified by the vector."

Nearly all the keywords have autocomplete and help. It speeds up my OpenScad work a lot, and the help is really useful to get a new user going. The only thing I find that you lose is the line highlighting of an error, but the status line also gives the line number so no big deal to go back to the numbered line in Notepad++.

Oh, and the way to use an external editor is really easy. In OpenScad just select 'Automatic Load and Preview', and close or reduce the size of the editor window. Then with the same filename open in Notepad++ and OpenScad, a ctl-s in Notepad++ will save the file, autoload it into OpenScad, and do the (F5-type) preview. easy.

Note however, that the files only seem to work on an older version of NotePad++ (as specified in the Thing), which is available at the Notepad site.

I just picked up a second printer, used, with only ~20 hours on it. It's a DaVinci 1.0. At one time, these were selling new from NewEgg for $400; I see it now on Amazon for $500, but I think I've seen it somewhere for $450. Ah, It's also sold at Walmart.

This is a terrible printer, as it uses a proprietary filament cartridge with an eeprom that absolutely prevents you from using anything but the manufacturer's overpriced filament.

Right.

I wouldn't have bought it if I didn't already know that the filament nonsense could be defeated. Some people wire into the eeprom pcb in the filament cartridge and attach an arduino programmed to reset the counter in the eeprom. There was a bit of a firmware war over this as the manufacturer (XYZ) 'updated' the firmware, which encrypted the eeprom counter. So the hackers figured out how to 'downgrade' the firmware, and etc, etc. Too much hassle.

The easy and right way to make this a usable printer is to just reflash its firmware entirely with open-source Repetier 0.92. Literally took 10 minutes, and now it runs Repetier firmware from Repetier Host software (I never installed the XYZ software, but I hear it's crap). I'll probably set it up to run Simplify3D as the host software. The Repetier firmware/software (or S3D) gives an order of magnitude greater flexibility in the menu system and settings, and of course, it ignores the filament counter eeprom. It makes it into a pretty decent printer

This printer is way underpriced for what you get, as XYZ is probably selling near cost, and counting on profits from their filament. So what you get is a 200x200x200mm (7.8"^3) build volume, with heated print bed intended for ABS. And a fully enclosed build chamber (that can easily be heated). The biggest drawback is that it's gigantic, much larger than needed for the build volume and a lot of wasted space inside. Looks good though. While the carriage and other parts inside are plastic, it doesn't appear to be common ABS, but something more rigid and hopefully higher temp resistance. Some of that wasted space is for the filament cartridge in the back - I'll be adding a spool holder on the top for a straight-down filament feed that has worked perfectly on my Replicator. I've only printed one item with it so far, but it came out really nice. If it can keep that up when I do some larger objects it'll be a winner.

Another note on the Da Vinci. Earlier models had a standard SD card slot on the edge of the circuit board, and all you had to do to use it was to cut a notch in a plastic cover for access. The slightly newer models, 1.0a, have a micro-SD card in the center of the circuit board so it's inaccessible, and for extra safety, it's glued in the socket. No problem, the glue comes off with acetone, and the card slot can be extended with a $5 cable. I'll be doing that since I don't normally have my printer tethered to a PC, I transfer the files via the SD on sneakernet. Other folks have used Toshiba FlashAir wifi SD cards on the Replicator and Da Vinci, so I'll probably be working that out soon.

Interesting discussions on the Tiko. Some highly polarized opinions, but some good information too.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/deltabot/fjYeArRAxTc[1-25]

https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting..._3d_ama_we_are_tiko_3d_and_were_on/?limit=500

[video=vimeo;124113151]https://vimeo.com/124113151[/video]

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I'm jumping in anyway.

gpoehlein said:

Depending on how cheap you are and whether you have any experience at programming, I really like OpenSCAD. All your objects are built by creating a program that describes you object with a series of computer code commands...

Click to expand...

I like the sound of this. I've done some programming, and I "think in math" to such a degree that I find specifying a shape about 100 times easier than drawing it in any form or medium.

Landru said:

Before anyone buys a 3D Printer I strongly suggest you play around and learn at least a little bit of CAD software first. If you don't like doing CAD, a 3D Printer is going to only be a novelty...

Click to expand...

Well, I know I'll have to learn to use some sort of 3D CAD software, and probably can't rely 100% on math to do it. But the thing is, with a cheap enough printer I'll be able to try out what I draw and see where I've gone wrong while I'm learning. Which means that learning to do CAD first would be a lot harder.

The other thing is this: the internet. Thingoverse, and I'm sure there are other fora, have useful things that other people have designed, and numerous folks who'd be happy to knock out designs on request if they're not to terribly complex. So print it yourself doesn't necessarily have to mean CAD it yourself.

For me, buying a 3D printer means also buying a 3D mouse. I've tried a (very) little bit of 3D CAD, and viewer a viewer, eDrawings from SolidWorks. And I am completely hopeless. When I try to manipulate a 3D object about six axes using a mouse that only moves in 2 dimensions, I simply find it impossible. Yes, I know, you use the mouse buttons to select which axes are being controlled at a given moment (or something like that) but it seems like I'm missing some critical brain circuits and I just can't do it. I got to try eDrawings with a 3D mouse for a few seconds once, and it was great. So I must have one.

The idea intrigues me but the amount of time people I know personally need to put into their printers to get useful results is positively staggering. I need strength, too, so at this point I am still more interested in custom lathing and fiberglass shaping.

Well, I've given up on all other CAD programs and work exclusively with OpenSCAD now. All objects are created but intersecting, uniting and differencing a series of spheres, cubes and cylinders. But don't use those objects literally - cubes can be any six sided object with differing dimensions one each of the three axes. Likewise, a cylinder in OpenSCAD can have two radii - the top and bottom don't have to be equal, and if one is set to 0, you have a cone. I just completed a program to generate parametric ogive nose cones that uses a for loop to calculate the radius at various intervals along the length and then builds the nose cone by stacking a series of conical sections on top of each other. All you have to do is plug in the length and diameter of the nose cone and the program generates it for you!

Admittedly, OpenSCAD is not for everyone, but for anyone with a bit of programming (or scripting - the code is very similar to that for programming Arduinos) experience and a bit of imagination, there is an awful lot that can be done with the program. About the only thing it isn't good at is complex free form shapes such as the human figure. But if you can describe an object as a collection for geometric shapes, OpenSCAD can likely do the job for you - no 3D mouse needed!

gpoehlein said:

All objects are created but intersecting, uniting and differencing a series of spheres, cubes and cylinders. But don't use those objects literally - cubes can be any six sided object with differing dimensions one each of the three axes. Likewise, a cylinder in OpenSCAD can have two radii - the top and bottom don't have to be equal, and if one is set to 0, you have a cone. I just completed a program to generate parametric ogive nose cones that uses a for loop to calculate the radius at various intervals along the length and then builds the nose cone by stacking a series of conical sections on top of each other. All you have to do is plug in the length and diameter of the nose cone and the program generates it for you!

Click to expand...

I'd still want the mouse, but I hear you that one can go a long way in OpenSCAD without it. (In fact, clearly one can do scads of shapes. :eyeroll

Question: Is it a hard limit that the spheres, parallelepipeds, and sections of cones (not to be confused with conic sections) are all the shapes one can ever use, or is it possible to "go deeper" and code different elemental shapes for one's self?

For instance, when you specify a cylinderoid with different end radii, the radius changes linearly along the length, correct? If one could define new elemental shapes, then one could create a cylinderoid wherein the radius goes from R₀ to 0 over a length of L according to a formula:(if I didn't screw up the algebra) which would print an ogive in one piece.

jqavins said:

I'd still want the mouse, but I hear you that one can go a long way in OpenSCAD without it. (In fact, clearly one can do scads of shapes. :eyeroll

Question: Is it a hard limit that the spheres, parallelepipeds, and sections of cones (not to be confused with conic sections) are all the shapes one can ever use, or is it possible to "go deeper" and code different elemental shapes for one's self?

For instance, when you specify a cylinderoid with different end radii, the radius changes linearly along the length, correct? If one could define new elemental shapes, then one could create a cylinderoid wherein the radius goes from R₀ to 0 over a length of L according to a formula:

r = R₀ - [(R₀²+L² - sqrt[(R₀²+L²)²-4R₀²L²])/2R₀]​

(if I didn't screw up the algebra) which would print an ogive in one piece.

Click to expand...

No - you can't add other shapes into OpenSCAD unless you want to go into the source code and physically code them yourself (it is open source, so it could theoretically be done). However, you can do objects of rotation, so you could create an irregularly shaped 2D polygon and rotate it around a central axis. That is how you get toruses, spirals, and some other irregular shapes. Or, you could calculate sections of your shape and build the object out of a series of conic sections. As I said, I chose the latter method to create my ogive cone rather than calculating an irregular polygon with the tangent ogive profile and then rotating it around the center. The way I did it was just easier for me (I already use a similar method for creating paper nose cones, so adapting that method to plastic was no real stretch). But it is truly amazing how many shapes you can create just using the cube, sphere and cylinder. For example, I created the elliptical nose cone by stretching a sphere into a regular ellipsoid, chopping off half and hollowing it out. All I had to do was double the length variable and I got the right shape!

gpoehlein said:

No - you can't add other shapes into OpenSCAD unless you want to go into the source code and physically code them yourself (it is open source, so it could theoretically be done). However, you can do objects of rotation, so you could create an irregularly shaped 2D polygon and rotate it around a central axis...

Click to expand...

It's true you can make anything, as you said earlier, from the unions, intersections, and differences of those three shapes. You hadn't said earlier the part about solids of rotation, and those certainly make lots of things a great deal easier. For instance, while there is nothing wrong with how you did your ogive, you could also have made it as a solid of rotation from an arc of a circle, if you pick the right arc and rotation axis: Start with a circle [I assume you can use a circle as well as polygons in defining a 2D shape.] Then intersect that with a rectangle [I assume you can perform intersections, unions, and differences in 2D as you've said you can in 3D] that has one corner positioned on the horizontal diameter but left of the vertical diameter to make a quasi-triangle with an arc for the hypotenuse. Then rotate that around its vertical side and you've got a tangent ogive. (Did I mention that I think in math?) The algebra to compute the parameters for that would be simpler than what I did before to compute the diameter vs. height (but before I didn't know that a solid of rotation was a possibility.) A parabolic nose cone would be trivial by the same method, if you can use a parabola in defining two dimensional shapes.

Incidentally, a portion of a cone, what one might reasonably call a section of a cone in normal English, is not a "conic section." The math term conic section refers to the two dimensional shapes that can be made by intersecting an infinite cone with a plane at various angles: circles, ellipses, parabolae, and hyperbolae. If you really want to get geeky about it, the object you use is called a frustum of a cone.

There are many examples of OpenSCAD nose cone shapes on Thingiverse, and I believe there has been some code posted here as well. I think that every shape has been represented by both the stacked frustum method and the rotated extruded arc method. I've got most of them collected somewhere, including my own, and I've been meaning to sort through them and borrow the methods I like best. Regular nose cones are pretty routine.

OpenSCAD can do lots of things:

Some cool cones there. What I'm really driving at is a shape I want to make which is ogive part way up and parabolic the rest of the way, with the slopes carefully matched at the change-over. I think it's mathematicaly possible to match the radii of curvature also. The resut would have parallel sides at the base and a rounded front, like an elliptical, but would be slimmer in the middle than an elliptical and have a smaller radius at the front. I've made these in RS, but it doesn't count until you make it tangible material.

Those are some really nice nose cones, vcp! I really like the Attack Ship Orion and Aquarius cones! Are those files available on Thingiverse or elsewhere? Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to do some really creative cone designs, nor do I have any original cones to make measurements from.

I do think that, as 3D printers become more common and capable of better quality, they will become an extremely valuable tool in recreating vintage oop rockets! That is why I'm REALLY. Looking forward to the Tiko - compared to ABS, PLA is too limited for our purposes (heat warping, hard to sand) and the machine I have now only does PLA.

gpoehlein said:

Those are some really nice nose cones, vcp! I really like the Attack Ship Orion and Aquarius cones! Are those files available on Thingiverse or elsewhere? ...

Click to expand...

I have the Aquarius NC and a few other things on Etsy: https://www.etsy.com/shop/RocketryCNC?ref=hdr_shop_menu I haven't kept that up very well, the pictures there are poor and way out of date. Three unrelated surgeries and assorted other procedures in nine months have consumed a lot of my play time.

Since it seems that so many have printers now, I guess I ought to put the files up on Pinshape or something.

Winston said:

From comments in their forum they must already have beta tester units in the field:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/tiko3d/tiko-the-unibody-3d-printer/description

https://www.tiko3d.com/

I got my $299 (missed out on the $199 level) Kickstarter Micro 3D printer a little over a month ago. The $179 price of the Tiko was only for Kickstarter backers and I'd guess it might sell for $249 for everyone else.

I plan to go with an even larger (much larger) Kossel delta-type printer (kit) once I get word back from a local 3D printer group member about exactly what his setup is that I saw at a maker group meeting. I find I need much more z-axis build volume than I thought I would.

Click to expand...

I didn't know of this Tiko 3D Kickstarter before it closed or I certainly would have participated. They missed their Nov 2015 ship date, but that's not at all uncommon for Kickstarter projects. Last update was Dec 7th, 2015, but it sounds like a project still making progress.:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/tiko3d/tiko-the-unibody-3d-printer/posts/1435303

They have plenty of people waiting - "16,538 backers pledged $2,950,874 to help bring this project to life."

I want one, too.

Very close to (late) release:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/tiko3d/tiko-the-unibody-3d-printer/posts/1484525

I got in at the $179 price. E-mail I got yesterday said that, although nothing is firm yet, late March is the current target.

Can't wait ...

YodaMcFly said:

I got in at the $179 price. E-mail I got yesterday said that, although nothing is firm yet, late March is the current target.

Can't wait ...

Click to expand...

From that latest news link I provided, it sounds like they're doing everything right, taking the time to absolutely get it right before shipping. Once you get and use yours, definitely provide feedback about it here. I and probably others will greatly appreciate it.