From: Scott Tilton (stilton@protoprod.com)
Date: Wed Feb 26 2003 - 18:04:43 EET
Our 2500+ came with one of those old tiny Miytac (sp?) DOS boxes.
It died during the first year of warranty and was replaced with one of the
newer, more modern looking "Wallingford" computers.
I seem to remember that as soon as we got the Wallingford DOS box, the time
spent waiting for complex slices to load completely disappeared.
(I had previously had to wait more than a couple minutes on really full
/complex slices)
Not that the Wallingford has been completely trouble free. It too was
replaced in the first year of ownership and later on its hard drive failed.
Scott Tilton
-----Original Message-----
From: Miller, Michael W [mailto:michael.w.miller@boeing.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 8:02 PM
To: Rapid Mailing List
Subject: RE: SLS problem follow on
I've encountered plety of failed builds on my sls2000 where it just "up and
dies". I have noticed that large numbers of parts on a layer and complex
cross-sections requiring lots of laser-ons and laser-offs drove up the
incidents of computer lock. Using outline also increased chance of failure.
Nasty builds that required almost a minute just to load the scanner are also
prone to this.
Question: Are the newer machines (2500, pluses, and Vanguards) more
reliable?
Disclaimer: Engineer and out the other!
Experience is something you get right after you need it.
Michael W Miller (michael.w.miller@boeing.com) 206-655-3289
The Boeing Company M/C 45-17 66-ZA-2320
Rapid Product Manufacturing 655-4366 Lab 655-4365
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Tilton [mailto:stilton@protoprod.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 7:51 AM
To: 'Brian Caulfield'; Rapid Mailing List
Subject: RE: SLS problem follow on
I ran into the "maximum number of parts" issue a long time ago.
I had large arrays of very small parts and after the machine crashed
(stalled, whatever you want to call it) I sent the info to 3D systems. (or
was it still DTM?)
Anyway, the techies quickly got back to me and told me I had WAY too many
parts being built simultaneously.
If memory serves correctly, they recommended that I limit things to 64 parts
being scanned on any one build layer. 32 if outline was turned on.
So now I have resorted to setting up the array of parts and then using the
"combine to one STL" tool.
It seems to work okay I guess. Although I'd still prefer that each part
fill and outline individually.
I remember being irritated at the time it happened.
I thought that sort of information should have been shared during training
or explained somewhere in the documentation.
There's no way I was the first person to ever come across that problem.
But then that sort of thing has happened more than once, so it doesn't faze
me anymore.
I've had builds stall for HOURS before, but haven't had the powder melt or
burn.
I wonder what caused your machine to get so hot to burn things up.
Good luck
Scott Tilton
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Caulfield [mailto:brian.caulfield@nuigalway.ie]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:09 AM
To: Rapid Mailing List
Subject: SLS problem follow on
Hi guys,
Thanks for all the responses, there are alot of good heads out there!
Just to ellobrate more the error message that I saw was " Insufficient
Scanner Command". The N2 levels were fine. What is the maximum number of
parts that can be built at one time on the machine does anybody know? I was
building a large number of test specimens and I am wondering whether this is
the cause, but I made a built previous to this with simialr settings and
part numbers and everything was fine. I was building part out of Duraform.
Once again thanks for the responses and ideas
Brian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Jan 17 2004 - 15:17:11 EET