|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Kevin Matthews
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 503
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mnash
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 2
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:08 pm Post subject: |
    |
|
| Does anyone else think that 5hrs for a 6”x6”x6” model seems a bit long? I would think that as a larger model would still require a hybrid process, why not use a 3 axis CNC based system? A 3 axis router with a 40”x 40” can be had for about $12,500 as apposed to $29,500 for the entry level system from Z-corporation. Granted their are some models that a 3 axis CNC system would not be able to produce, but I would think in those instances one could outsource to a rapid prototype service facility. It seems to me that you would be able to produce larger and less fragile models faster with less material costs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mnash
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The commentator above seems to totally misunderstand the Z-Corporation technology as well as where the real costs lie when constructing complex models. Who cares if you save a few dollars of material when it costs you a couple of thousand in added labor? Using a 3-axis router would never allow you to efficiently construct a model of any complexity that was rife with negative spaces and undercuts. Also, the above writer hasn’t factored in the costs of adding the software necessary to drive a 3-axis CNC setup. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cwho
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 1
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My company LGM [/url]http://www.lgmmodel.com[url] uses both a 3 axis mill and a Z Corp printer to create a wide variety of models. In fact I think you are both correct. We use the mill primarily for terrain because it is sigificantly cheaper than the Z corp and we can create 4' x 8' landforms much more easilly than with RP. However, we use Rapid Prototyping for most of the vertical because it allows for much more complex shapes. We could do some buildings on a 3 axis mill but to get much detail we would need 4 or 5 axis or multiple fixturing. Either choice adds significant complexity to the CNC programing and cost to the tool path generation software.
We find the appropriate use of both a good solution to commercial modelmaking. However you need to define your goals particularly if you are a Architectural Office. What are you trying to achieve with your technology? If it is concept modeling of buildings RP is a better choice. IF you do a lot of land planning you may need to look elsewhere for those solutions.
Charles [/url]
_________________
LGM - visualization products for architecture, engineering and development.
CADSpan - Bridging the gap between CAD and Rapid Prototyping |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
