http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/3d-printers-for-microsocpy-tp7585214p7585222.html
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy> Post images on
http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Hi Aryeh,
>
> You have an option to go to filament extruder printers or stereolithography
> printers. First group as you probably already know, melt a thermoplastic
> filament and extrudes it in a particular layout. In stereolithography a
> laser is polymerizing a curable resin. We tried the Makerbot Replicator 2
> for the filament printers (FDM). It was ok, but wasn't easy to handle. This
> is a high-maintenance printer and tends to break a lot. You need to figure
> out the settings for different details, so we have got many bad prototypes
> with it. Makerbot is now out of business - they stopped manufacturing 3D
> printers. We recently bought a Form2 SLA printer and are very happy with
> it. It provides with a high-resolution nice finish details and you get to
> vary the mechanical properties with the resin - Formlabs, the manufacturers
> of Form2 offer a variety of different formulations - Tough resin with good
> tensile strength, Flexible resin for squishy parts, a range of standard
> plastics, and a Dental resin - a biocompatible one. A disadvantage here is
> that cured resin tends to change mechanical properties and become brittle.
> This, however, is what theory says and we have not seen this as of yet
> (this will probably affect the parts over the course of years). Another
> consideration is the cost of the resins - you will need to spend ~$150/l of
> resin. To give you an example, we printed a model of fly brain with the
> size of approx. 3''x2''. That model consumed 90ml. So for big parts - this
> is not practical. For smaller parts or parts that require high precision I
> would trust the SLA more. The cost is reasonable ($3400) and the customer
> service is good.
>
> If you want to choose an FDM printer, please consider a review made by the
> Make magazine. We found the ratings they do pretty reliable and thoroughly
> made (
http://makezine.com/comparison/3dprinters/). According to their
> review, LulzBot is very good along with the Zortrax. A Maker facility here
> on campus has bought LulzBot and was very happy with it - it appeared to be
> very reliable. The printer that Alexander mentioned is very tempting, but
> is much more costly.
>
> Good luck with your printing.
> Vladimir
>
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Alexander Cramer <
[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > *****
> > To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> >
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy> > Post images on
http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your
> posting.
> > *****
> >
> > Greetings Aryeh,
> >
> > We employ two different types of 3D printers for creating parts and 3D
> > models at
> > the University Imaging Centers at the University of Minnesota.
> >
> > We have a couple a MakerBot Replicators for simple parts that have worked
> > relatively will for our users needs and our own, but we've also very
> > recently added
> > a MarkForge II (
https://markforged.com) for stronger parts.
> >
> > It prints using Nylon as it's base material but then has a second
> extruder
> > that adds
> > a fiber filament such as Carbon Fiber, Kevlar, or Fiber Glass for added
> > part
> > strength.
> >
> > You do have the option to just print in Nylon too which is quite useful
> > even without
> > fiber reinforcement.
> >
> > Both printers are pretty affordable which was a key point for our core
> > since we
> > have just entered the world of 3D printing.
> >
> > Word to the wise if you do purchase a MakerBot of any model- Make sure it
> > has the
> > new Smart Extruder +. Any of the older models are woefully inadequate and
> > will
> > give you nothing but headaches.
> >
> > If you have any questions just let me know, happy to answer what I can.
> >
> > Alex
> >
>
Dept. of Molecular Biology