Does she like to tinker and engineer for hours? Then an ender like printer is golden and cheap. Does she just like to print by pressing 3 buttons and not work with the printer but the prints then there are out of the box printers for that as well. Really depends. Does she want insane speed? Corexy also exists. Theres a printer for every use.
This post is confusing because you barely shared any content. That photo is as non-descriptive of the work you did as is possible. Consider adding other photos to give us a clue of what we are looking at here.
I got stuck on googling how to make a fillet in freecad, to which the answer appeared to be, "yeah, nah, you sort of can't". Oh okay, this program is not for me.
Edit: if people want to help/criticise, I recall the problem was that I couldn't do it parametrically, which is the only way I like to model any engineering parts. So far the only thing that information has gotten me is a downvote. If freecad is as full featured as you say, then this should be easy to do. Feel free to tell me how.
EDIT 2: after the info I got, I looked into it more and discovered my problem was a bit different - I couldn't do a parametric offset line in a sketch, because I needed to make a particular pattern. I ended up doing it with OpenSCAD if I recall. I apologise for saying freecad couldn't do fillets, that would've been extremely basic. It was still a very painful experience just to figure out that it couldn't do what I needed.
I tried using Freecad as to filet something recently and it told me to look at the error console for more information, after googling for where the error console is, I realized the message to look at the error console was being output to the error console.
There was no more information to be had. It is a UX and functional nightmare, and it is what it is, but the downside is this means millions of engineers are being trained on subscription web sites, and eventually this will be used to both squeeze people for money, and also to prevent people from creating unauthorized or patented parts.
I don't know how long ago you tired this (early versions were, even I will admit, kind of crap) but in the current FreeCAD release of 0.22.1 it's incredibly easy.
Just select the edge(s) you want to fillet and and press the "fillet" button in the Part Design workbench...
Or, if you want to get fancy and make your own bespoke custom fillet. Well, you can define its profile in a sketch. Here I just used a bezier to make an arbitrary curved shape. You are defining the profile of the material you want removed here, i.e. the negative space. You can make this as mathematically rigorous and precise as you like.
Then, position it somewhere on the vertex you want to profile and once again in the Part Design workbench, select that sketch, and hit "subtractive pipe."
I appreciate all the effort you went to, and I can do this as it turns out. Now that I've researched what problem I was having, it turns out the issue was that I couldn't do a parametric offset line in a sketch, which was crucial to what I was doing at the time, so I had to give up on it.
I was using 0.19 at the time, because that's what I've got installed.
Paid software that exploits their own paying customers' data and pushes regular ads for their own or for other products while simultaneously increasing prices.
FOSS software that respects it's users but also is nearly incapable of doing the job it's supposed to.
The FOSS stuff can do the job. You just need to tweak these 10 config files because it doesn't come with sensible defaults. Oh, and it's built against a different version of those libraries. Better downgrade two and upgrade that third one. Actually, just fork and modify the source. Much easier. What were we trying to do again?
You mean when people just ask someone else instead of heading to the single best information resource that's ever existed in human history for an immediate answer?
I making a point that you seem to be missing. If you have to point out some way to get around a problem that any given user will have with a piece of software, then that’s why your software is not being used. This is the continual problem with the Linux community, they think that everyone wants to learn this stuff. Most people just want their software to work. They don’t want to have to do any sort of googling to figure out why it’s crashing or why it’s running slow or why it doesn’t have this or that feature. Every time someone like you tries to point out that someone can just google something you lose another person that may have been willing to use FOSS in the future. Instead, maybe go try to fix their problem because they sure as hell aren’t going to.
First, YOU missed the point in the original context which is different versions of different libraries may be needed to run software. Flatpak solves that particular problem.
Second, I don't owe you or anyone tech support, nor do I care about your satisfaction level with software. Use it or don't.
If you're the kind of helpless person who has to be spoon fed answers, then perhaps Linux or FOSS isn't for you, and other alternatives exist that have professional support staffs.
You act as though inputting the same information ("What is Flatpak?") into a search engine instead of a random comment on a random forum is just A BRIDGE TOO FAR. That's a pathetic attitude, but plenty of people will still step up to help the helpless. I just don't have to spend my free time being one of them - though I often have when it's obvious they've already at least tried to find an answer on their own.
This is it exactly. The foss works fine and does the job these guys are just whiny bitches who want everything handed to them in perfect condition...but without conditions.
Oh no I have to mod a config file to make it do what I want...why can't the devs just read my mind?!?!??
Oh no I have to mod a config file to make it do what I want…why can’t the devs just read my mind???
nobody has to read anyone's fucking mind, why can't you just make it a fucking settings menu? You're the ones making it HARDER TO EVANGELIZE FOSS. For fuck's sake! You're entirely missing the point!
If you’re the kind of helpless person who has to be spoon fed answers, then perhaps Linux or FOSS isn’t for you, and other alternatives exist that have professional support staffs.
you're the exact kind of person making FOSS look bad to the majority of people. Since you don't seem to realize, I run the programming.dev instance. I most likely have been working in tech longer than you. This kind of attitude you have towards "people should just learn everything about every piece of software they use" is why people like you shouldn't be near open source software at all. You make it fucking impossible for people like me to get anyone to even try FOSS because all they remember are morons like you saying "just figure it out". I'm not going to teach my mother in law what a fucking flatpak is and there is absofuckinglutely no way that she is going to be able to google it and figure it out. It has nothing to do with learned helplessness. It has to do with the fact that she's a painter, not a tech guru, and gatekeeping FOSS by purposefully making it hard to use is such an idiotic thing I have no clue how you could even defend it. Your actions make big tech companies become more entrenched in people's lives. It is by your hand that people don't want to use things like Firefox.
I’ve used FreeCAD for a few months for small/medium-sized projects and it crashes way too often. It’s pretty much unusable for me. I only use it for CAM these days and do my CAD with OnShape.
Not necessarily, the tech is still new and has its issues that need to be worked out.
Ultimately though, modular houses are nice, but they're all similar to each other because they're made in a factory and have a size limit.
3D printed houses have the advantage of being able to be any shape or layout (Within reason) that the builders/homeowners want while still having the potential to be significantly cheaper and faster than standard construction.
Basically, it's a good middle ground between standard construction and factory modular homes
modular houses are nice, but they’re all similar to each other
I'm not so sure. New American and Canadian houses are famously similar to each other. We build big neighborhood blocks of almost identical looking track houses. If I could, instead, order a house from online catalogs, that might actually increase aesthetic diversity.
We used to have more diversity in housing styles, which is why older neighborhoods have lots of different home styles. But a lot of those 100 year old neighborhoods are actually full of Sears catalog homes. Basically, pre-cut, pre-fabricated modular homes!
For anyone who stopped reading at the headline, it's because the material they were using didn't reach the strength requirements of the project (5,000 psi), despite what previous tests had suggested (6,000 to 8,000 psi). With revisions to the material used, they intend to begin working on the second planned house in the spring.
Anything to regulate and restrict the people/end users but not address any real problems in society.
Go after the gun companies, gun lobbies, NRA? No, never. Address housing, income, and educational inequality? That sounds complicated, tough, and expensive.
This has similar vibes to shaming/regulating people for using too much water in their showers and for washing their cars, but when a multi-billion dollar oil company spills millions of gallons of crude into the sea causing years of environmental damage due to negligence, fine them a few million dollars and tell them they've been very naughty...
So tired of politicians being in the pocket of Capitalist scumbags.
Well, not anything (if you actually think that's possible, then I have a challenge for you: make a functioning gun out of cheese), but an average hardware store should have everything you need to produce something capable of firing a shot.
Usually part of 3D printed guns aren't 3d printed. I'd bet you could make a one-time-use gun out of cheese, but the firing pin and springs would probably have to be made of something else to use a traditional round.
If you go with a gunpowder charge ignited with a flame, it'd be much easier. I'm sure there's even a cheese that could sustain a flame to ignite it with too. You could even make a cheese bullet.
“Three-dimensionally printed firearms, a type of untraceable ghost gun, can be built by anyone using a $150 three-dimensional printer,” Rajkumar wrote in a memorandum explaining the bill. “This bill will require a background check so that three-dimensional printed firearms do not get in the wrong hands.”
.... No way an ender 3 is going to produce something that doesn't blow up in your hand.
so. i suggest people get that 150 dollar lol-printer. Should take care of itself.
an Ender 3's print quality is too low to reliably handle any of the critical components, even for one or two uses. something like the defcad AR lower receiver (which is for some odd reason designated as "the firearm" under ATF regulations...) can absolutely be printed, but not reliably by an ender 3- at least not a stock ender 3. (the defcad team was using resin printers for the dimensional accuracy.)
in any case, you can go to any big box hardware store, drop around 30 bucks in plumbing parts and some quality time with a dremel will produce a fully automatic firearm. should we now regulate plumbing hardware?
Someone assassinated the former Japanese PM with a block of wood, two small pieces of pipe, and some simple electronics, and that was extremely advanced for an amateur hand crafted firearm
Spend enough time in the sticks as a teenager and I guarantee a pipe shotgun will basically materialize out of thin air at some point
3DPrinting
Newest
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 0 day(s) ago).