May 20, 2014
Cem Schnitzler, a German engineer sent us his new idea of designing a Crown Extruder for 3D printer, which was inspired by a microscope.
"When you use a mircoscope and the resolution is not enough you turn the head and get a better resolution." notes Schnitzler. "So why don't we develop an extruder using this principle?"
Schnitzler uses the concept in his design of an extruder, the Crown Extruder for 3D printer. The print head consists of a few nozzles with different diameter to make printing process more efficient. "For printing high resolution layers you can use nozzle with small diameter, and for printing low resolution parts you can turn the head and select a nozzle with larger diameter." says Schnitzler.
Below is the concept of the Crown Extruder mounted on a Mendel Pursa.
In the image below you can see how the drilling holes are placed.
In this example the extruder has 4 nozzles with different diameter, but of course you can have more nozzles included in the design.
Schnitzler says this idea is protected by copyright but free for privat use. So what do you think? Is this idea insane? If you like this idea and would like to help him develop this extruder you can contact Schnitzler here.
Posted in 3D Printer Accessories
Maybe you also like:
- Prusa Nozzle: All metal food safe RepRap hot-end
- Open source modular and modifiable workstation kits for your 3D printer
- New 3D printer test kit to measure your 3D printer's abilities
- On Indiegogo: First Dual Pinch Wheel Extruder for 3D Printers
- 3D Print Finisher on Indiegogo
- Hyrel 3D introduces new extruder for printing with Clay, Plasticine & Play-Doh
- BeagleBone Black offers credit card-sized Linux PC for $45
- Transform 3D print into a high quality finished part with 3D Refiner
- Open source V-Slot linear framing system fully funded on Kickstarter
- Therminator 5: a durable alternative to existing RepRap 3D printer hot ends
Thanks, now it's on the public domain and its not patentable. So you wanted help from the community but this isn't open source? Why you then use a Prusa? Anyway, the idea is doomed.
Joe D wrote at 5/21/2014 5:39:24 PM:
I suspect the main benefit would be time savings, with the coarser head filling internal areas, and then the smaller nozzle doing the detail work at the perimeter. On another issue, I wonder about patents like this one, and on the recent Makerbot patent for changing colors/materials on a single nozzle. Both mechanisms are obviously based on fluid controls that have existed for many decades. I realize that a new application for an existing design may be patentable. But, I think they can't be something that is obvious to someone in the industry. E.g. Back when the idea of a 3D printer was being developed, if you used a toothed belt to move the head on a 3D printer, I don't think it would have been patentable. But, I read a lot that the main thing that determines if something is patentable, is the size of your budget for legal fees.
Stef wrote at 5/21/2014 3:56:28 PM:
buy a little mill and lathe for <2000 USD and build it and prove the concept... is it that hard....
Grant wrote at 5/20/2014 8:43:22 PM:
Lassi is correct, you cannot protect an idea by copyright, It must be patented if you he wanted prevent people from using it, in its current state, it is fair use. http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
3Dmaker4U wrote at 5/20/2014 8:37:35 PM:
Nice idea. However, I cannot figure out how to prevent melted plastic to leak between the hotend and the revolving nozzles. Among other aspects that need attention (e.g. assuring precise positioning without increasing the weight too much).
ThatGuy wrote at 5/20/2014 8:23:38 PM:
Interesting. It wouldn't help with the color issue that much. It would help more with the different nozzle sizes. Have a 0.1-0.2, a 0.4 and a 1.0 mm aperture heads- I don't see any real advantage beyond that range. Much smaller and you'll have to deal with clogging, much bigger and it gets tough to melt that much plastic with the current power set ups. Unless different shaped nozzels would help with something else? Have an oval shaped one, or something like the cake frosting shooters for some reason. I think it would all come down to: -How much weight it would add -The leaking that has been mentioned. The material not in the active nozzle would potentially leak out and make it so you couldn't turn it more.
Mike wrote at 5/20/2014 7:26:08 PM:
a couple of issues I see right away. First, you would either have to heat the whole head to get it to extrude or have individual heating elements for each nozzle. Second, where the head turns, how are you going to seal that so that the filament doesn't flow out of that area.
Len wrote at 5/20/2014 6:32:32 PM:
This could also be applied to multi-colored prints where you have a different color coming out of each nozzle. (in this application all nozzles would be the same resolution)
lassi wrote at 5/20/2014 2:06:34 PM:
protected by copyright? no such thing for pictures, unless you use the same pictures. the known problem with this(and others that have similar ideas, like the recent makerbot patent) is that leakage is hard to fight. also this model has a rather long thin zone for the filament to go through. so, I don't want to be negative nelly again but this while an interesting idea is not interesting news unless someone provides a working model.
Arquit wrote at 5/20/2014 1:49:19 PM:
From my POV, this would increasy the price of the extruder a lot and the benefits of spending just a second changing from one nozzle to another instead of spending about 1 minute changing it manually doesn't worth the money. This taking into account that you don't change the nozzle in the middle of a print
3Ders.org provides the latest news about 3D printing technology and 3D printers. We are now seven years old and have around 1.5 million unique visitors per month.
