7.62 x 39 mm round
by clintkc, published
I wanted to print it out to test the Thing-O-Matic's ability to print objects that are much taller than they are wide or deep. I printed it with a raft, no support, 20% infill (mainly for weight than stength), and 2 shell layers.
The print went very well, up until about the end of the "casing" section. Since I designed my filament guide, I don't have to baby-sit my TOM nearly as much...so I let the print run while I ate dinner. I visit to my upstairs office found that the base of the bullet was rocking back and forth, fore and aft during the print. My nozzle seemed extra close to the printing object, which caused drag and probably caused this error.
Anyhow, this object printed just about how I expected. The TOM shakes about quite a bit, and I wondered how well it would do with tall, narrow objects like this. ANSWER: Not very well.
I'm relatively new to the MakerBot scene (had mine almost a month now), but very familiar with CAD and CNC. My belief is that objects such as this (if not all objects) should be printed with a moving extruder, not a moving build platform. (I could be wrong... I was once before, back when I believed I was mistaken... heh heh.)
Recent Commentsview all
I like your "cool" settings comment. I have not tweaked the "cool" settings, only noticed that the "cool" portion of Gcode compilation do not take very long. Like I said earlier, I definitely need to learn
amp; adjust my Skeinforge settings.
I like the Corsair you're holding in your profile pic... are you an R/C guy? I've been building R/C planes since I was about 10, but my current inventory only consists of a SIG Kadet Senior with an O.S. 46 (extremely basic, but I still love to fly it... I modified the wing dihedral so that it's a
lmost flat, and it performs very well for what it is) , a Hangar 9 Aresti 40 with a 4-stroke Saito .72 (this thing will move and dance), and still in the process of building a Top Flite Cessna 182 Skylane kit that I bought over 10 years ago (with the full interior kit), etc. I got married since I b
ought the kit, and have moved it from 5 different houses. (I'm a general contractor and insurance adjuster... either I'm 5 states away from home for 6 months at a time, or I'm too busy designing and building homes. And I'm also waiting for a suitable gas engine to put into my Cessna 182, as well a
s re-designing a lot of things (especially the paint scheme) to look like a more modern version. I have a vinyl printer (and now a 3D printer) which should help scoot things along. The wing is built, the fuse is 1/2 built, the tail feathers are complete, and I"ve been packing these build parts aro
und for 8 years. I haven't worked on this model for 9 years. I want the fully-functional "fowler" flaps, I've got the LED lighting kit from RAM (even the rotating beacon), and I plan to make this look like a real Cessna 182. I've been around 'em all my life. I've flown planes, designed model air
planes, designed jet aircraft in conjunction with Lockheed-Martin for a private investor... I basically live my life in 3D. Kinda sad, really. My wife stares at the back of my head. :( I tell her it's better than staring at the front of my head. :)
Hey... I downloaded it off of some free CAD server, and that's what the author called it. I didn't pull shells out of my SKS and spend an hour miking everything to make sure it was a 7.62 x 39mm round. It looked like one, and I printed it.
Poor results in my print, and poor results in my feedback.
Sorry to disappoint anyone. My results have very rarely resulted in this much negative feedback. Next time I'll pull a full background check on whoever designed the file.
Better yet, I'll just post my own friggin' designs from now on.
(CONTINUED)... 1) I would highly appreciate it if designs were categorized by:
a) Printer the designer owns (some posters do not even own a printer)
b) Printer the design was printed with
2) I would appreciate stronger posting protocols. I'm seeing many designs that are not 3D printer capable, and usually have no comments or actual build photos attached. And usually several in a string from the same person. I understand that it would require a dedicated staff-member (or several
) to screen posted designs for quality and/or printability... however (as a successful businessman myself) I also understand the need for consistancy, quality, and eliminating wild-cards.
So far, I hear myself as the only one complaining. And that's fine... MakerBot is a fairly new business, and s
eems to be overwhelmed. They've done some great advertising, made a great product, and can't seem to keep up with the demand. Their shipping times are terrible, at best. Their documentation is sparse
amp; inconsistent. And their customer support refers me to Wiki pages that give very vague answers to my questions.
It's a great product, but needs improvement. I realize this is an "open-source" based product... however, if MakerBot doesn't take it to the next level, they will be over-run by another company with the balls to make real things happen.
And I hate to say that. MakerBot could make it. But they'
d better take some huge steps forward. Otherwise, they'll not last long.
My 2 cents. And 2 cents ain't worth much these days, I know.
Liked Byview all
Give a Shout Out
Please note that the STL file name is wrong... on my SD card, it was "7.62..." not "62..." No, I'm not an idiot. :) I did my time as a Marine infantryman, and I definitely know my weapons & rounds. This is NOT a 62mm round! :)
Best of luck! :)
You must be logged in to post a comment.