From: Adrian Bowyer (A.Bowyer@bath.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Jan 17 2007 - 13:04:20 EET
Ian Gibson wrote:
> I don't really think dot matrix printers were extensively used in the
> home by anyone other than the hobbyist/enthusiast. In the UK, I think it
> was Canon with their bubblejet printers that really exploded the market,
> and their output was much better than the average book printing because
> of the ability to integrate graphics with text. Dot matrix did perhaps
> contribute in terms of demonstrating there was a potential market (see
> my previous rp-ml comment about the power of toys). However, the
> technology no longer exists (see my previous comment about waiting for
> the big boys), need I say more?
I have to say I agree with Steve - there are probably still more dot matrix
printers in the world than inkjets in all those automated machines for spitting
out small pieces of paper. And most people who had a CP/M Z80-based computer or
a BBC Micro or an Apple II in the early 80s had a dot-matrix hung on the back of it.
> I read the blog with interest - looks like you're doing some good work.
> A question though, how does the mechanical properties of your PCL match
> up to the ABS or PPSF?
Much tougher but less stiff. You can make a small part with RepRap then put it
in a blender and have it come out virtually unscathed. (We were trying to
reprocess the material back to granules...)
Also we have no delamination problems at all - each layer welds completely to
the previous one (indeed, we have the opposite problem - getting the previous
layer cool enough before the start of the next layer so that the previous layer
doesn't splurge all over the place - a big fan seems to do the trick).
Oh - and objects RepRap makes are not permeable to liquids; but we haven't done
any gas-tightness tests yet.
Yours
Adrian
http://staff.bath.ac.uk/ensab
http://reprap.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 18:12:59 EET